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
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Regular Session
Monday, May 8, 2006
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
DAVE NICHOLSON, Commissioner Pct. 4
U
C~c,
.~
2
1
- 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.- 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
T nr n ~ u
May 8, 2006
--- Commissioners' Comments
1.1 Status of Kerr County Indigent Health Care program;
consider/discuss, take appropriate action to modify
or revise Indigent Health Care policy provisions
1.2 Presentation on Outdoor Burning
1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve a resolution of support for Center Point
Volunteer Fire Department grant application to
FEMA, Department of Homeland Security
1.4 Consider/discuss, approve application for
Comptroller's Tobacco Compliance Grant
1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
reappoint Commissioner Williams to Airport Board
for a two-year term effective June 1, 2006
1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
open bids for Town Creek Crossing improvements,
Pct. 1 & 3
1.7 Public Hearing for preliminary revision of plat
for Lot 7 and Privilege Creek Road right-of-way,
Privilege Creek Ranches, Pct. 3
1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
contracting with consulting engineer for review
of engineer documents in Kerr County Subdivision
Rules and Regulations
1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
modifications to Road Construction Standards in
Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations
1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
concept plan of Falls Ranch, Pct. 3
l.ll Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
have the 1978 "Simplified Method to Establish
Base Flood Elevations" for Kerr County updated
and to consider a workshop on floodplain
1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
Road & Bridge to purchase a ditch bucket attachment
1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
abandon, vacate, and discontinue approximately
95 feet of Drummond Drive in Precinct 1
1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action con-
cerning the bid award to Martin Marietta Materials
for cold mix and black base
1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action con-
cerning Manufactured Home Rental Communities Rules,
how they apply to property at 150 Lydick, and the
possibility of a variance from same, Pct. 1
PAGE
5
8
33
46
47
48
49
51
52
57
58
63
73
75
77
80
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
I N D E X
nay a, ~~~e
1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
review revision of plat for Lots 19 & 20 of
Hidden Hills and set public hearing for same
1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
review revision of plat for Lot 25 of Twin
Springs Ranch II and set public hearing for same
1.18 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
revision of plat for Falling Water, Lot 117A &
116D, creating Lot 117R, Pct. 3
1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
Employees' Health Insurance coverage for 2007
with regards to process and timing
1.20 Consider "Library Agreement" between Kerr County
and Kerrville and authorize County Judge to give
notice to City of Kerrville of County's intent to
terminate and renegotiate the agreement
1.21 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve grant agreements with Texas Department of
Agriculture for award under "Texas Yes!" Program
in connection with event under sponsorship of
Kerrville CVB to benefit Kerrville Boardwalk Fund
1.22 Reports from the following departments:
Information Technology
Road and Bridge
Facilities and Maintenance
Collections
4.1 Pay Bills
4.2 Budget Amendments
4.3 Late Bills
4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports
5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee
Assignments
--- Adjourned
PAGE
86
92
104
105
109
115
122
127
129
135
138
142
157
158
163
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,•- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-" 2 9
25
4
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would everyone please stand and
join me in a moment of prayer, followed by the pledge?
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if there's
any member of the public or the audience that wishes to be
heard on an item that is not a listed agenda item, feel free
to come forward at this time. If you wish to speak on a
designated agenda item, we'd ask that you wait until that
time, and it would help me if you'll fill out a participation
form at the back of the room so that I won't miss you when
that item comes up. It's not absolutely essential. When we
get to that item, if you wish to be heard, get my attention in
some fashion and we'll see that you're heard. But at this
time, if there's any member of the audience or the public that
wishes to be heard on an item that is not a listed agenda
5-8-06
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
item, please come forward at this time. Seeing no one to come
forward, we'll move on. Commissioner Letz, what do you have
for us this morning?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just we had some pretty good
rain over most of the eastern part of the county. Out in the
far southern part of the county where I live, there was only
about 2 and a half inches, but up north of Comfort, they had
about 5 and a half inches, so it was a -- pretty general.
Other than that, that's all I have.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's good -- it's good and
muddy out in the western part of the county, too. I like
that. Just a comment on the series of articles that the West
Kerr Current's been publishing on some of the pioneer west
Kerr County families, and the last one was on the Baldwin
family. Previously, they had one done on the Oehler family
and some others, and I -- I really like this. It gives you --
the reader a little better grasp of the culture of west Kerr
County. I didn't know that Commissioner Baldwin came from
such a distinguished lineage, but I could have guessed that.
But, anyhow, thanks for doing these. They're really well
done. That's all I've got.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Seems like it would bring a
little more respect to some of us, too. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Here's your opportunity, Commissioner
Baldwin.
5-8-06
6
1
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: Okay. Only thing I wanted to
say was congratulations to the Tivy golf team making -- going
to state, to the state championship. It's not an individual,
but the whole team, and I think it's -- that's tremendous in
itself. We have one girl from Tivy going to state in the
track and field, and that means that she is one of eight
people -- eight girls left in the state of Texas, so that's a
feat in itself. I'm telling you, it's not an easy thing to
get to the state tournament in Austin, so congratulations to
them. And I understand there's some kids from down in the
eastern end of the county that are doing the same, too, but I
won't mention it to anybody. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it was a moment of
pride, I thought, on Friday afternoon to see the United States
Olympic flag raised over Kerr County, and I think that's quite
an event and quite a big deal. And I note also with interest
that, in connection with that, almost 3,700 or 3,800 room
nights were booked in Kerr County hotels -- Kerrville hotels
for -- to accommodate the visitors to Kerr County, which I
sort of translate into a pretty halfway decent economic impact
for all of us here in the days ahead. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. I, too, was privileged to
be out at the Hill Country Shooting Sports Center on Friday
evening where they kicked off that World Cup Shoot. Some of
s-a o~,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

you may have wondered why we had all these flags out here in
front of the courthouse. Those flags represent the
approximately 50 nations that are shooting, competing in the
events being held out there. That started the end of last
Commissioner Williams said, I -- I'm not sure people really
realize the full economic impact that these kind of people
have, and the number of people, and then the -- the support
staff and groups that they bring with them. There's about 325
shooters, I believe, but they -- they then have other members
of the teams, the coaches, the families, and it -- it stacks
up to a pretty high number. And if there were some real
professional effort made to calculate the economic impact of
what this one event is -- is going to mean for Kerr County, I
think folks would be absolutely amazed.
It -- it doesn't impact some of the areas where we
would otherwise be lacking. It doesn't impact our
infrastructure; doesn't pose any additional requirements on
it. We've just got some very widely traveled visitors coming
to our city with full pockets, and leaving with them less than
full. So, it's a wonderful event, and the distinction of
being one of the handful of official Olympic training sites I
think is a fabulous distinction for -- for Kerr County and
s-s of
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L1
22
23
29
25
this area, and I think it's going to bring a lot of
recognition to us. And I'd invite all of you to go out and
observe some of the goings on out there. I think you'll be
amazed at the international cultures exhibited and -- and the
going to be a fabulous thing for this area.
Let's move on with the agenda, if we might. First
item on the agenda is the status of the Kerr County Indigent
Health Care Program and consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to modify or revise Kerr County Indigent
Health Care policy provision. Beth Taylor, our Indigent
Health Care Coordinator at the local hospital, is with us
today, and she and I have been talking about maybe some
modifications or changes or additions to our policies that
might be of benefit in bringing in a little bit more
definition to those policies so that it's easier for her to
qualify those people and to impose requirements on them as a
condition of their eligibility. She's provided us with
some -- some suggestions, some ideas, and certainly if t'iere
are any others that occur to her over the -- over the coming
months, I've asked her to bring those to our attention. And,
of course, if any member of the Court has any. Ms. Taylor
tells me that, at the outset, she has a -- a policy handbook
that I presume is mandated down through the feds down through
the states and so forth, and it's somewhat akin to the San
S-B-Ou
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
9
Antonio telephone directory. But so long as any policies we
adopt do not conflict with the provisions of -- of that
mandated voluminous policies that she's given to deal with,
that we can do so, essentially. So, I'll turn it over to her.
MS. TAYLOR: Thank y'all for letting me come and
share with you. I know that you're vastly aware of how many
j payments that I've been certifying since I've been here, so I
thought maybe you'd want to see who was doing all that. I
went to training in Austin in January, and -- you know, 'cause
I was kind of thrown to the wolves in this, and the program
had been -- no personnel had been handling it for several
months. So, to be honest, it was -- it was quite backlogged,
and that is the reason for so many carry-ovens from the last
fiscal year, and why our -- our payments have been so high so
far this year. I brought, for anybody that would like to have
one, a copy of the applications, and I've put -- kind of
adapted some cover sheets to give people a lot of information
about the program, what I need when they submit their
applications. But the applications that the State wants us to
use are pretty generic. I mean, they, you know, ask for a
reasonable amount of information, but it's up to the
coordinators to decide, you know, how much they want each
applicant -- you know, how in-depth they want to qo to prove
it.
s-a-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
10
So, I brought copies of those for anybody that wants
there's a lot of people that are in and out of the program,
and so I'm kind of just going to give you some of my -- what
I've seen in the past few months that I've been there. My
office, of course, is over at the hospital, and I think a lot
of people don't see the indigent program as being anything but
a part of the hospital. I think because the office is there,
and that there is a medical third-party person who will go to
a person's room who doesn't have insurance and have them fill
out the -- the application, or assist them to fill out the
application, I get a lot of applications for people who are in
the hospital that don't have insurance. Which is great; this
is what the program is for, is for people who qualify and
don't have any other source of payment.
But what I see a lot of, too, is that because I'm
there, it's really convenient. There's a lot of paperwork.
Any time I receive an application, that's going to generate a
lot of paperwork, because not only do you have to go through
it; then I have to send out notification of an interview, you
know. And a lot of people, once the crisis is over, they
don't care, until they -- they're -- okay, back up. They're
denied if they don't make the interview. There is an
5-8-06
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
automatic denial, and at that point, the handbook just kind of
leaves it open. They come in 'cause either they start getting
Then we fill
So, one of the things that I thought would be good
or you don't get the paperwork that I need, the -- you know,
copies of whatever information I need back in a reasonable
amount of time, which is 14 days, then not only are you
denied, but you can't reapply again for "X" amount of time. I
think that would help lessen the paperwork load, and also have
the people understand this is not just something that we're
just throwing out there all the time; that it's not going to
be easy to do. You know, to understand that -- you know, that
when we ask for something, we want you to come in, it's
serious business. So, that's one of the things. Another
thing is getting -- giving false information to me. Now, I
think they're denied once we prove that it's been false
information. I think we should have -- be able to have a
penalty passed that they can't reapply for a year, two years,
however you want to do it. So, these are some of the things.
I think y'all all got the printout that I had sent
over there about some of the ideas I had had of what we could
s-s-oh
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
2 2
23
24
25
do, again, with -- for lack of a better word, to give me more
teeth to work with. Another thing is, I would like to be able
thing to work with on the applications is, people say, "No,
I'm not working. No, I don't have anything. No, no, no."
Well, it's hard to prove a negative, you know. "Okay, I'm not
working. Prove it." I -- "This is the only car I have," or
"I don't have any car." So I thought, well, is there a way
that I could work with the Tax Assessor's office to not take
up so much of their time, maybe create a faxable form that,
once a week, I could, you know, send over? 'Cause I have 14
days to process the application. You know, "DO you have any
other vehicles registered to this person under this name?"
And at their convenience, they could be able to look it up and
fax it back to me. That was a thought I had.
I know the jail nurse is busy, busy, busy, and I
thought maybe, too, we could have a faxable form back and
forth to her as clients -- I call them clients -- as inmates
that are on the indigent program are discharged or sent to
T.D.C., that she could let me know so we could keep better
track of -- of who is actually on the program and who is no
longer on the program. Let me see. I've got a whole list of
-e-or,
13
1
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
stuff, and I don't want to take up so much of your time. I
know that Tommy Tomlinson and Mindy and I had met with a
company that has software for this program, and I really
think, if it's at all possible, that we -- that would help
keep better track of clients and their eligibility,
everything. I mean, it will track things that we're not able
to track, like duplicate Social Security numbers. It's never
been used somewhere else, and when I first came into the
office over there, everything was done by pencil and paper, so
I've put a lot on spreadsheets on the computer. That's easier
to -- excuse me -- pull up information. But I think that
software would certainly give us, you know, more ways to be
able to control duplicate claims and things like that, that
come through. Excuse me, allergies.
There are some times -- and I don't know how y'all
would feel about this, and it would be totally, you know, if I
feel like there was no other way, but I think sometimes if I
would have -- could have the authority to go to someone's
house. I mean, I did that in a previous job, and it doesn't
intimidate me. I know it's a different clientele that I'll be
working with, but, you know, to verify some things, you know,
as far as what they're telling me on it. Some concerns that I
have identified is, again, I think everything that I send to
people on the application, everything has Sid Peterson logo on
it, and I would -- I think it probably would behoove the
s-e-oh
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
'~ 2 9
25
They
and it's not through the hospital. I mean, that line really
has become very blurred. I think that's pretty much
everything that I had on here. I'll probably -- when I leave
here, I'll think of some other things, but I will open it up
to you. Do y'all have any questions for me?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ms. Taylor?
MS. TAYLOR: I thought you might have one or two.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- it's the first time
that I've ever seen anyone from the Indigent Health Care come
over and actually offer some ideas to make the program better,
and I appreciate that very much. We have talked about -- and
I think it's worth talking about again, is -- is this idea of
linking via computer different entities. I could see a
possibility here of being linked to the Tax Assessor's office,
the Appraisal District office and those kinds of things, for
her to just automatically get -- get the information that she
needs. I guess we can ask our I.T. guy about that with our
5 3-06
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
15
new programs. My big question is, do you have a lot of
illegal aliens apply? And the key word is "illegal." And if
so, do -- do we grant some of them some of our services?
MS. TAYLOR: According to the handbook by the State,
it -- the illegal aliens, even though they are here illegally,
if they are residents of Kerr County, or any county in Texas,
that that -- it does not make them ineligible because they're
here illegally. But to answer your other question, as far as
I know, I only have two people on the program that don't have
Social Security cards, and I saw their -- their green cards,
so I don't think that's a big problem. I mean, it hasn't been
since I've been there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. What triggered that
was, I just saw in the national news this morning --
MS. TAYLOR: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, they've got to
focus on something, and today they're looking at the drain on
the health programs across the nation. I was just wondering.
I'm sure there are some. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Beth, thank you for coming.
Appreciate it very much, and thank you for your efforts on
behalf of the County and this program. It's a major
program -- it's a major expense, and if there's any way that
we can tighten up the rules and the regulations within the
boundaries of the law, we want to do that.
5-8-06
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
16
MS. TAYLOR: Sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you can, can you tell me,
what is a Form 117 and what's on it?
MS. TAYLOR: A Form 117 is the notice of
ineligibility, and that basically is what I send out when
someone, again, does not come in for an interview, doesn't
submit what I need, or I -- I get information that they are no
~ longer eligible. Like, this one lady called the other day and
i
left me a call-back number, which happened to be a Bandera
number, and she was on the program -- excuse me. So, I
answered her questions and stuff, and then said, "Why are you
at the Bandera number?" She said, well, she'd had surgery,
and this was the people who could take care of her. And I
happened to know when she applied that she was living with a
boyfriend in Ingram, so I said, "Are you going back to this
address?" And she said, "No, never." I said, "Do you have
somewhere -- are you planning on coming back to Kerr County in
the near future?" And she said, "Well, I don't have anything
planned." So I said, "I'm sorry, you're now ineligible for
this program." And at that point -- so, there are different
reasons that people -- but Form 117 is the notice of
ineligibility.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there are several
categories that would put an individual ineligible?
MS. TAYLOR: Right. Yes, sir, there are. They have
s-e ne
17
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
to be residents, income -- there are four of them, and of
course, I'm standing in front of you and I can't remember
them, but there are four different reasons why people qualify
as ineligible.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In all cases, indigent
health care is a reimbursable type program? The amount of
money we spend either goes directly to the hospital or to the
health care provider?
MS. TAYLOR: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It never goes to the
individual?
MS. TAYLOR: No. No. And I've had that come up.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's always after-the-fact;
is that correct?
MS. TAYLOR: Yes, mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So, really -- okay.
You identified -- you identify as a concern Indigent Health
Care clients who consistently use the emergency room as their
means to obtain the services of a physician.
MS. TAYLOR: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you have suggestions on
how that can be remedied?
MS. TAYLOR: I thought about it, and that's why I
kind of brought it out, to see if anybody else did, 'cause I
don't know how -- how to -- other than to try to talk with
5-8-OE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
18
them. We all know how difficult it is to find -- at times to
find a physician in Kerrville, and I do get people who are
made eligible on the programs; they will say, "Well, what
doctor? I can't find a doctor to go to." So, often they end
up in the E.R. There are some cases that I see as the claims
come through that they're continually using the E.R. for
whatever reason. They're in pain, so they come in, and those
are the ones that I wish there was something. And, no, I'm
sorry to say, I don't have a really good solution to that one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Generally speaking, anyone
who shows up at an emergency room for treatment is given
treatment, right?
MS. TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the policy of the
~ hospital?
MS. TAYLOR: Yes, mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And then they figure out how
the payment's going to come?
MS. TAYLOR: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, it's a real sticky
issue, isn't it?
MS. TAYLOR: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a -- on that issue with
the physician, do other counties contract with a specific
physician or physicians' group?
s-e-n~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
19
MS. TAYLOR: Some do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that is who they have to go
to?
MS. TAYLOR: Yes, some do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that something you could
inquire about?
MS. TAYLOR: We could, but I will tell you, because
we pay on DRG, or similar to Medicaid, that, you know, a
physician usually will only have so many of his patient load
be indigent or Medicaid and stuff, because they get reimbursed
on a lesser amount. So, I don't know -- I don't know how easy
that would be. I certainly could look into it, but I don't
i know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One thing I was thinking of was
Franklin Clinic.
MS. TAYLOR: Franklin Clinic doesn't see any of our
I clients.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And won't?
MS. TAYLOR: Not as far as I know. I know they
don't see -- I've never had contact with them, but they don't
see any of our clients.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Ms. Taylor, 7 also
appreciate you being here.
MS. TAYLOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Offering to help us with
-e-o5
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
this expensive issue. Eligibility requirements include where
you reside?
MS. TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Things like that, but they
also include income, assets?
MS. TAYLOR: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Can you just give me an
idea of who's indigent and who's not?
MS. TAYLOR: The -- it went up $4 recently. After
you go through the formula that the State gives us to -- you
know, this is the amount, we have to determine the household.
Who is eligible people in the household? If there's a spouse,
but the spouse is on S.S.I., we can't look at any of the
spouse's income, so that would be a one-member household.
But, anyway, once we figure out the size of the household,
then -- and we go through the gyrations of, you know,
deducting this, dividing it by this and stuff, we get down to
a single-member household has to have under $172 a month or
less. Which is very, very low. I mean, I understand that.
Again, have you people that -- and you're always going to have
them, I understand that, who know how to work the system, who
know how to answer the questions. And, like I said, how do
you prove a negative? That's the biggest obstacle I have.
You know, you say no, no, no. Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: You're an employee of Sid
9-06
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
Peterson?
MS. TAYLOR: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON
Do you have other duties
other than --
MS. TAYLOR: Yes. And I will tell you, this -- this
is a full-time job.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What other kind of things
do you do?
MS. TAYLOR: I work with the -- in the Social
Services department, and mostly data entry, and when the other
lady's not there, answering the phone. I mean, it's not that
much, but 25 percent of my time is supposed to be dedicated to
Social Services.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Are prisoners' medical
expenses paid under this program?
MS. TAYLOR: Some are. Most of them are for
medications. Some of them do come into the emergency room for
whatever reason, but most of them are for --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're not paid under this
budget line; they're paid under my budget line.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's another issue.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. Same thing.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's all I've got.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My turn.
s e-ate
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
COMMISSIONEP. LETZ: I had a very short --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you took -- you had
your time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you need to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. My question
is, we've noticed in our bills -- and today there's a couple
of thousand dollars that are being paid outside this
community -- that the local taxpayers are paying someone else,
San Antonio, et cetera, for some services.
MS. TAYLOR: Right.
I
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How does that work? Why --
why are we paying Tejas $700, as opposed to paying a local --
MS. TAYLOR: Several -- most of them are heart
patients that are referred to San Antonio or sent to San
Antonio. I have had one incident where a gentleman was in an
accident and was picked up from the accident scene, taken by
helicopter to San Antonio. And I will tell you, the San
Antonio hospitals are extremely aggressive about -- I mean,
they will almost call daily. They have so many hours to
notify a county that there is a patient there that is a
possible candidate. I mean, they -- they are very aggressive
about making sure I get the paperwork, that it's processed,
and to see if they are eligible for it. But a lot of them are
_-a-oc
23
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
-- like I said, are transferred heart patients. And I believe
that there are two different claims on Tejas, on two different
people. I think they're both heart patients. Accident
victims. And then there's one gentleman who has just been
referred from a Kerr -- and that -- therein lies the key.
They have to be referred from a Kerr County provider to an
outside of the county. And people understand that when they
apply, that, you know, we want you to see local providers and
things. I think there was some Gillespie County from several
months back --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's one in here today.
MS. TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: From Gillespie County.
MS. TAYLOR: And the lady was having back problems,
went to Fredericksburg to stay with friends, 'cause she
couldn't stay by herself. She lived by herself. They ended
up taking her to the Hill Country Memorial Hospital emergency
room, things like that. Then she comes in, 'cause we can go
back -- if you qualify, you qualify for three months previous;
we can go retroactive, previously, and that's how sometimes we
can pick up the out-of-county providers.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In your -- in the backup, there
were four suggestions --
MS. TAYLOR: Mm-hmm.
s-a-o6
24
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 we could implement that
would give you a little bit more teeth.
MS. TAYLOR: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: First thing, I'd like to make a
motion that we adopt the four outlined suggestions, Kerr
County I.H.C.P. policies addendum to the program.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There are actually five,
Commissioner, if you take a look on the second page, Number 1.
She's posed it in the form of a question, really, the appeals
process.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, I'll add that first one on
item -- under additional suggestions.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Do any of those involve the
jail, Jonathan?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, they're all -- I'll read
them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second the motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: First one is, if an applicant to
the I.H.C.P. does not appear for a prescheduled appointment or
call ahead of the appointment time to reschedule, the
applicant may not reapply to the I.H.C. P. for a period of six
months from the date of missed appointment. Number two, if an
I.H.C.P. client does not respond to written request for review
or fails to provide requested information to complete review
within the designated time frame, he or she may not reapply
s-e-os
25
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
for a period of six months from the date set for review.
Number three, if an applicant or client gives false
information to I.H.C.P., he/she may not reapply for a period
of one year from the time the false information was
identified. Number four, if an I.H.C.P. client fails to
report a change within 14 days of a change, and that change
affects their eligibility, he or she may not reapply for a
period of one year from the date change was identified. And
the next is, need a plan for appeal.
MS. TAYLOR: That is just -- we do need a plan for
appeal.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They need a plan for appeal, who
will review application and denial when applicant appeals a
decision made by I.H.C. Coordinator. But who's the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who do they appeal to?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who's --
MS. TAYLOR: And that's what I wanted to identify.
I've had two people appeal, and it's -- and when we ask in
Austin, "What do you do?" Well, "The County comes up with a
plan on how to appeal." And that was the answer that we got
in Austin; "Well, the County has to do this."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me -- go back to my motion.
Let me take that out of my motion, 'cause that's -- we can
address that at our next meeting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll set that up as a
e v 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
z6
separate item.
MS. TAYLOR: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I have a motion and a second
as indicated. Any question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One. I'm sure that you're
in contact with other people that do the same kind of work
that you do. You can eYChange information with them. If you
know of or hear about an appeal process that somebody has
that's working, who does it?
MS. TAYLOR: I haven't yet, but --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If you hear about that --
MS. TAYLOR: I sure will. I sure will.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- tell us that.
MS. TAYLOR: One suggestion that was from Gillespie
County was that, you know, go to Gillespie -- you know,
another coordinator and let them review, since they're very
familiar with all the rules and regulations to it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say that again? Go to
another county?
MS. TAYLOR: Right. In other words, like the lady
over at Gillespie County, if she had somebody appeal it, then
she would give me the information to review it, to see if I
would come up with the same decision.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know if I'd want
somebody in Fredericksburg making the decision about
5 - 8 - 0 6
27
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
taxpayers' money at Kerr County. But I do see Rit Jons in the
audience. He may be the one that -- be this person. Come on,
Rit.
MR. DONS: I have no independent knowledge or input
into this area, Commissioner, but I'll be glad to help any
other way.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just one quick question,
Judge. On Items 1 through 4, to the extent that you are
familiar with the federal rules and state rules and
regulations, these things are appropriate?
MS. TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And within the law?
MS. TAYLOR: These are not in conflict at all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or comments on the
motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I might have another
comment on this.
JUDGE TINLEY: As do I. Go ahead, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Please, on the appeal, see if
you can figure out a process, and I'd encourage you to talk
with the Tax Assessor, or probably first talk to our I.T.
s-a-oo
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
28
Manager, John Trolinger, and see how you can maybe link to get
more information that we already have available, so that you
have access to it. Second, I don't see any problem at all
with using Kerr County letterhead; I think that's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Me too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Get with our court coordinator.
We can get letterhead printed for you out of our Commissioners
Court budget to start with. I think that's not a huge
expense, and I think it's a very good idea. I think it would
probably be beneficial to -- I don't know if you have a --
MS. TAYLOR: Or even just e-mail me, you know,
something that I can have on the computer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Get with Kathy on that --
Ms. Mitchell, and she can help you with that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm going to raise the
question, Judge, about the stationary and other things like
that, and including the software, if these were eligible
expenses that can be charged to the program. And the Auditor
should know the answer to that. As opposed to being charged
to Commissioners Court.
MS. TAYLOR: Are you asking me?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm looking through you to
the Auditor.
MS. WILLIAMS: Excuse me, he's sitting back here.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Either one of the auditors.
s-&-a c.
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. WILLIAMS: I'm sorry, you have to repeat the
question.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The question is, is
stationary and items like that, and perhaps the software
package that Ms. Taylor is referencing, are those legitimate
expenses that can be charged against the program, or do we
have to fund them some other way?
MR. TOMLINSON: We can fund them through that fund,
but, I mean, they're -- they're not part of the -- of the
amount that gets applied to -- to our 8 percent, so it's a
county expense.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, that was a yes and a no,
~ right?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. You can, but we don't have
any money there, is what he's saying.
MR. TOMLINSON: We'll be out of money in that fund,
is what I'm saying.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have some questions for Ms. Taylor.
Of this software program we've been hearing about, that's the
Indigent Health Care Solutions that --
MS. TAYLOR: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that there's been so much talk
about in recent months.
MS. TAYLOR: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And those people are due back here --
5-8-u6
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
30
they're going to be setting up a system in Kendall County, and
they promised me they would come here and make a -- a test
i review of some of the Sheriff's things out there, I believe.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I hope that happens. I haven't
heard anything, but that would be a fabulous solution.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what they indicated to me.
The Indigent Health Care Solutions representative has ~
indicated that, at no obligation to the County, he's willing
I to do that. He says that's probably his best methodology
for -- for selling his software.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I know that Tommy had brought
up --
MR. TOMLINSON: We're tentatively set up to install
that program. The reason we haven't is we have -- we have a
contract with a third-party -- another party that expires in
September, and we -- we can't enter into -- we can't do
anything until we notify that party that we intend to cancel
that contract.
JUDGE TINLEY: But I.H.C. has -- I.H.S. has not done
a test of any of the Sheriff's -- review of his bills or
anything?
MR. TOMLINSON: I haven't seen a test that they've
done from other counties, so I wouldn't anticipate any
different outcome from -- from one county to the other as far
as that's concerned.
s-~ of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
31
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Taylor, let me ask you another
question, and I realize this is just going to be your best
judgment. You mentioned having the -- the availability to you
of going out and doing an on-site review to verify
eligibility. Do you have any idea of what percentage of
the --
MS. TAYLOR: It would be very small.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, not the percentage of -- of
reviews that you would make, but you had mentioned that there
are some that have learned how to work the system. Do you
think, from a cost benefit analysis, that would be very
productive?
MS. TAYLOR: I think -- I think so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON; My -- a few years ago, I
was in Rome and had a medical emergency and went to the
hospital at 2 o'clock in the morning, and got a lot -- got
some really good treatment. It would have cost several
thousand dollars at Sid Pete. And when I -- they didn't even
ask my name. When I went to leave, I said, "Who do I pay?"
And they thought that crazy American was really humorous.
They -- they -- not only did they have no interest in the fact
that I was not a -- not a citizen of Italy, they had no
procedures for making payments for anybody. Socialized
medicine may not be as bad as we think it is.
-H-oti
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
32
JUDGE TINLEY: Another thing I might mention to you,
Ms. Taylor, on trying to do asset reviews and things of that
nature, our Court Collections Department might be another
resource to you. They have -- they subscribe to some search
services, and may already have at their disposal information
on a number of people that apply into your system.
MS. TAYLOR: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'd say on probably 50 percent or
more, we probably have some information in our collections
system about them.
MS. TAYLOR: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on this particular
item? Thank you for being here.
MS. TAYLOR: Thank you. I appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I appreciate your interest and --
MS. TAYLOR: I did want to share a --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- desire to help.
MS. TAYLOR: Well, thank you. Our medical
third-party person was driving in Friday, and she met with
Mindy over here, and Tommy and I. And it was so funny,
because she said she hadn't been here in a while, and was
going to Junction for a wedding on Saturday and driving down
Sidney Baker, and her husband was saying, "Well, how are you
going to know when you find the courthouse?" She said, "Keep
driving, and look on the left, and there's -- you know, the
5-d-06
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
33
courthouse always has flags out front." So, they drove up and
went, "Oh my gosh." So, that was the understatement. Thank
you all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's funny.
DODGE TINLEY: Let's move to the next item on our
agenda. Item Number 2, presentation on outdoor burning. Do
you want to run with this, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll just turn it over to Rex.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. EMERSON: That was short and sweet. We'll
attempt to do this the modern way, but we'll see. We're kind
of pieced together here. Commissioner Letz had talked about
making a presentation on outdoor burning to educate the Court
and the public on what the rules are, and that's what I've
attempted to do. Interestingly enough, T.C.E.Q. does not have
any kind of presentation prepared for this, even though it's
their responsibility. I talked to Austin, San Antonio, and a
couple of other regions.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's nothing strange about
I that.
MR. EMERSON: The general rule in Texas is that
there is no outdoor burning, period. All outdoor burning is
illegal, with the exception of firefighter training, disposal
or land clearing, prescribed burns, pipeline breaks, or
5-tl-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
~5
34
recreation/ceremonial. Camping out, basically. If you don't
fit in those exceptions, you're not allowed to burn without,
basically, significant repercussions. Firefighter training.
It's important to note that the volunteer fire departments can
authorization from T.C.E.Q. prior to performing the training.
If they don't, then their subsequent -- T.C.E.Q. can basically
shut them down and refuse to issue any future permits for
doing such. When they're doing the training, they do not have
to conform to the general burning requirements, which we'll
get to in a minute.
Disposal or land clearing, which is what we have the
most of around here, includes domestic waste, household trash,
but does not include non-burnables. Multiple non-burnables
household trash when the government entity having jurisdiction
does not provide on-site trash removal. So, it's pretty
restricted. If you're in the city, you can't do it unless the
City specifically allows you to, because there is provided
on-site trash disposal.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rex, I saw throughout this
document several times that the -- what you do burn has to be
produced on that same piece of property; that you can't cut
brush on your ranch and bring it -- take it to Letz's and burn
5-E3-UG
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
it over there.
MR. EMERSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it talks about that
several times throughout here. I don't know what the
importance is of that, but obviously, that's important.
MR. EMERSON: Well, the way T.C.E.Q. looks at it is
if you have a piece of property that you accumulate other
people's waste onto, you're operating a de facto landfill, and
you're subject to additional regulations. So, that's why it's
worded that way.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There are areas in the
county where -- well, first of all, the County doesn't provide
the service to begin with, but there are areas of the county
where individuals pay for pick-up service. How does that
relate to this?
MR. EMERSON: What T.C.E.Q. says is that the mere
fact that the government says its okay for somebody to
contract does not meet that requirement. So, that doesn't
constitute -- or authorize trash service.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. EMERSON: So, they're still okay burning out in
the rural areas where that happens. Domestic waste, as it's
described in here, is what normally results from life in your
house. Now, it does not include trees, construction waste,
carpet, furniture, anything like that. You know, it's
s-e-o6
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
36
household trash, clothing, minor issues. Diseased animal
requirements for burning do not apply. Animal remains and
waste byproducts. It's important, this applies to a
veterinarian. It doesn't apply to you or I out on our
ranches. The veterinarian is the only one this applies to.
It has to be an animal that they're either currently treating
or have treated, and it has to be burned on the veterinarian's
property. The veterinarian can't come out to your ranch,
Jonathan, and treat your cow and it dies, and then burn it on
the spot, okay? You can, but the vet can't, interestingly
enough.
Maintenance and land clearing includes trees, brush,
kind of overgrowth. It's used for clearing land,
Back to what
Commissioner Baldwin was asking, it's when the materials are
generated only from the property on which the burning occurs.
You have to conform to the general requirements for outdoor
burning. And I know I keep referring to that, but we're going
to get into that in a minute. There's quite a few details
that go with that. And you must not produce adverse effects
for structures containing sensitive receptors. How's that for
II a government definition? Okay. Structures containing
5-B-06
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
37
sensitive live vegetation. The term "man-made structure" does
not include such things as ranch fences, bridges, hunting
blinds, or facilities used solely for the storage of hay or
other livestock feeds. So, it's basically housing. And
"sensitive live vegetation," quote, unquote, is defined as
vegetation which has potential to be damaged by smoke and
heat, examples of which include, but are not limited to,
nursery production, mushroom cultivation, pharmaceutical plant
production, or laboratory experiments involving plants. And,
Buster, mushroom cultivation does not mean going out to the
pasture and getting mushrooms out of the poop, okay?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It doesn't apply to
individuals with serious respiratory problems?
MR. EMERSON: It applies to individuals that have a
or a structure. The fact that they may have a
there's a residence there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a distance, or is it
just a matter of "affected"? I mean --
MR. EMERSON: There is in the general rules, and I
can't remember ~f it's 300 feet or 300 yards, but --
MR. ARREOLA: It's 300 feet.
t_g_nF
38
1
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. EMERSON: Thank you. Crop residues. When
agricultural management. Item C primarily applies to the
burning of sugar cane, from what I can tell. There seem to be
specific rules for burning of sugar cane. Otherwise, there
doesn't appear to be any. Brush, trees, and other plant
~, material off-site, which is different, can be performed by
county or municipal government. We have to request burn
approval from T.C.E.Q. It says "may" in the code. T.C.E.Q.
analysis says "must." So, as far as they're concerned, we
have to have written approval from them to burn accumulations
of brush, trees, anything else, primarily used for obstruction
of water flow and causing flooding, or anything that provides
habitat for vermin, is the definition of protecting the health
and safety, and it must occur on a site owned by the local
government. And, interestingly enough, it cannot be used to
augment a normal brush control procedure, so you can't use it
to jump around normal brush control procedures.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Who owns the site that
B.F.I. operates?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: City.
MR. EMERSON: The city, I believe.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It is the city?
MR. EMERSON: May also be authorized only when
5-a-oo
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
39
do it more than once every two months, so you can't burn all
the time. And if you look at (i), it may not occur at the
municipal solid waste landfill without prior permission from
T.C.E.Q. Okay. Prescribed burns, Jonathan. Burning for
ecological restoration. It's recommended that you notify
T.C.E.Q. of your intent to burn. It's subject to the general
requirements for outdoor burning, and if there's a lack of
notice, T.C.E.Q, can fine you anywhere from $1,000 to
$250,000. So, it's important to notify T.C.E.Q. if you're
going to do that.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Now, "prescribed burn"
means some authority is given, permission for a specific burn?
Is that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's -- "prescribed
burn" is when you're burning to improve range or -- range
habitat or wildlife habitat, I think would probably be a
general -- there is -- I think it's a described term, but
that's kind of what it covers. We call it controlled burn a
lot, but that's not really defined. "Prescribed burn" I
believe is defined. There's a whole set of rules that kind of
go with that, and some legislation about prescribed burns.
But, generally -- and it's actually -- essentially, you have
to call T.C.E.Q. It's not the common practice by most people
in this county; most of them just call the Sheriff's
Department. I think it's -- maybe we should add something to
5-B-06
40
1
2
3
9
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Dispatch. Maybe they should -- you know, if they can, or
maybe we should put it on our recording that they have to let
T.C.E.Q. know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, part of -- part of the
prescribed burn is all kinds of conditions, barometric
pressure and all those things. So, if a guy gets up in the
morning; i.e., the wildlife management area out near you that
does prescribed burns once a year, they're not -- they don't
-- you know, when that pressure's right, that's when they
burn. They don't burn when the T.C.E.Q. hippies come to work.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Now, the way we administer
our burn ban rules is we allow prescribed burns during the
burn ban.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Which means they phone
T.C.E.Q., and they're adhering to all of the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The way we did it last year, and
it's kind of -- it's been a work in progress, is that we kind
of pawned it off on the Soil Conservation, or NRCS --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- group, that they have to
approve the burn plan. And then they can -- you can do
prescribed burns during those conditions. Around here, that's
pretty much exclusively during the winter months. And it also
should be probably noted that there is now a Hill Country
5 H - 0 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
41
Prescribed Burn Association --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- that's been founded and
trying to be active in this, and probably future requirements
will be they're going to have to be a member of that, and that
will be -- you know, give you some training that goes along
with that.
MR. EMERSON: Pipelines. You can only burn if
T.C.E.Q. says it's okay, so if there's a major spill, don't
i light it up. Recreation. Typically, what everybody thinks
about; it's camping, cook fires and so forth, but it has to be
exclusively for recreational or ceremonial purposes, and it
cannot be commercial purpose -- commercial in basis, I should
say. Fires in general may not contain electrical, insulation,
treated lumber, plastic construction materials that are not
wood. They don't want you sending a bunch of carcinogens into
the atmosphere. These are your definitions that we went
through. "Practical alternative" is an economically,
technologically, ecologically, and logistically viable option.
And there's actually a Senate Bill that's -- that has passed,
that will go into effect shortly, that changes that a little
bit, and we'll go into that at the end of the -- at the end of
the presentation. We've already gone through structure
containing sensitive receptors and sensitive live vegetation.
Sunrise and sunset as set forth under U.S. Naval Observatory
5 - R - U C
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tables on the National Weather site. And "distinguished," as
it's referred to in the code, means the absence of any visible
General requirements. These are the general
requirements for all outdoor burning if you fit an exception.
Okay. It says outdoor burning which is otherwise authorized
shall also be subject to the following: Prior to the
', prescribed or	controlled burn, notify	the Texas Forest	Service
and T.C.E.Q.	I didn't put T.C.E.Q. in	there, but that'	s what
they recommend. Must be outside the corporate limits of the
city or the town. Burning shall be commenced and conducted
only when the wind direction and other meteorological
conditions are such that smoke and other pollutants will not
cause adverse effects to public land, landing strips, and
navigable water; i.e., the Guadalupe, or off-site structure
containing sensitive receptors, which goes back to the
housing. If the burning causes or -- or may cause smoke to go
across a highway or roadway, it's the responsibility of the
person burning to put a flag person out there.
You have to be a little proactive on that. It's not
just the fact that it does. If it has the possibility of
doing it, they're supposed to provide a flag person. Must be
conducted downwind of or at least 300 feet from any structure
containing sensitive receptors, okay, unless you receive prior
-e-oa
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
written approval from the person with possession of that
residence. So, not necessarily the landlord, but the person
actually living there. Shall be conducted in compliance, no
earlier than one hour after sunrise, no later than one hour
before sunset. Has to be attended by a responsible person at
all times during the active burn phase. That doesn't mean
someone has to be there when the fire is virtually complete
and not advancing. If it's principally glowing coals,
T.C.E.Q. says it's okay to walk away from it. If the smoke
continues after the active burn, residual fire or smouldering
shall be extinguished if there is a potential for nuisance or
traffic hazard. So, if you're burning close to the road, you
have to put it out. And the burn area shall not be allowed to
increase after the times stated above.
Burning shall not be commenced when surface wind
speed is less than 6 miles an hour or more than 23. Okay.
And that's not just actual, that's predicted. So, when you
get up in the morning, if you can look at -- the best place to
look is the National Weather Service web site, and it's
detailed by region. The web site address is www.weather.gov.
It's pretty simple and easy to find, and the reason those --
those wind speeds are in there is to be appropriate for the
smoke to dissipate at the low end, and for you to be able to
control your burn at the high end. Same thing we went through
before. Can't burn carcinogens. They don't want you or
s e-oh
1
w
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
~2
23
""' 2 4
25
44
anybody else breathing it. Responsibi]ity. Even if you
follow the rules, you're not exempt from liability for
burning, so it's important to know. Penalties. Violate --
simply violate the burn code, you're liable for up to a $500
fine, mandatory community service. In certain situations, if
you're performing outdoor burning under certain situations and
it gets away from you; i.e., you're reckless, you could be
looking at 2 to 10 years in prison and up to a $150,000 fine,
depending on the amount of damage you cause. Need more
information? Kerr County burn ban number, fire risk
assessment, Texas Forest Service, and T.C.E.Q.
Now, we talked about a Senate Bill. Effective
June 14th, there's a Senate Bill that takes effect. It's
currently in the rule making stages, and it has not come out
in writing yet, but what they sent me is the preliminary. Is
that on domestic plant material in attainment areas, it
removes the restriction on burning plant material when on-site
trash service is provided. There's still a restriction that
applies to garbage, but as far as plant material, there's some
relief there. Maintenance and land clearing removes the
requirements to consider practical alternatives in
nonattainment areas, but Kerr County's not one of them, so
that doesn't have much effect on us. Off-site burning of
plant material removes the requirement to obtain T.C.E.Q.
approval if it's supervised by fire protection personnel, it's
s-a-oc
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
located outside the municipality and it's in a county under
50,000, conducted -- and it's conducted at a site designated
for consolidating burning waste generated from residential
properties. And that's it. After the slide presentation,
there's a series of general questions that I copied out of the
T.C.E.Q. web page; the Administrative Code is attached to
that. And then in the very back is the Health and Safety
Code, Chapter 352, that backs up the material.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Rex.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is this information
available on request from your office?
MR. ARREOLA: Yes, sir. We have a package basically
with the Administrative Code 111. It's all -- what he was
explaining, it's all in there.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: So, people who have
questions about burning, we should refer them to your office?
MR. ARREOLA: Yeah. We have -- I just have a
question on domestic waste burning. Is it allowed in the
county, basically burning in a barrel?
MR. EMERSON: (Nodded.) As long as you don't burn
what you're not supposed to burn.
MR. ARREOLA: Obviously, it's just domestic waste.
MR. EMERSON: Correct.
MR. ARREOLA: I have another question, but I'll get
with you later.
-8-G6
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very interesting.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Let's move to Item 3, if
we might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
approve a resolution of support for the Center Point Volunteer
Fire Department grant application to FEMA, Department of
Homeland Security. Commissioner Williams.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This resolution is asking
the Court to support the application for Center Point
Volunteer Fire Department and their request for FEMA funding
to purchase a 2,000-gallon pumper-tanker, and to obtain
additional funding for training funds in firefighting and
defensive driving. I know we typically support other fire
companies, so I'm asking for support in this. Also, I'd like
to point out to the Court that the Fire Chief in Center Point
has indicated to me that they're going to set up a training
class for NIMS training, which I think all of us still have to
obtain that particular training block sometime this year
pretty soon. And in my discussions with him on Saturday, he
said he'd be more than happy to -- first of a11, he's going to
set it up for his own fire company, and he'd be happy to have
II us participate if any oŁ us want to obtain our training at the
I
i Center Point Volunteer Fire Department.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, there's two
of those courses required. Will this be both of them?
5-s-oa
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
47
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He said there's three hours
worth of training. If it's -- it very likely could be, but 7
could ask that question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; No, it's just the NIMS.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just the NIMS, N-I-M-S.
Okay. So, I would move the resolution of support.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; Second.
JUDGE TTNLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve
the resolution of support. Any question or discussion on the
motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TTNLEY: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TTNLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to
Item 4, if we might. Consider, discuss, and approve
application for Comptroller's Tobacco Compliance Grant.
Mr. Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is just renewing what we
normally get each year. But backing up a little real quick on
i your NIMS training, Commissioner Williams, there are about 10
or 12 different NIMS courses, and you can actually get online,
even at your own computer at your home, and take them. it
Everybody in my department's had about six of those different
NIMS training.
e-o6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
48
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I pulled them down off of
the web site.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're real --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This gives us an opportunity
just to do the lecture.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And they're good courses. They
do point out some good things. But that's what this is. And
this tobacco grant, we've done it every year. It just helps
with offsetting some of our costs of our D.A.R.E. instructor,
doing tobacco compliance inspections at retail stores, things
like that, and educating our kids.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 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: The motion does carry. Let's move to
the next item; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
to reappoint Commissioner Williams to the Airport Board for a
two-year term effective June 1, 2006. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda. You
8-06
49
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
may recall that we're under staggered terms. My term expires
a year from June 1st. Commissioner Williams' expires
June lst, and I make a motion that we reappoint Commissioner
Williams to the Airport Board.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: 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: The motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Do that one quick, before
he backs out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Congratulations,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Amazingly, that brings us right on
schedule up to our 10 o'clock item. Consider, discuss, and
take appropriate action to open bids for Town Creek Crossing
improvements. Looks like we've got a couple of bids here that
have been submitted. First bid is submitted on behalf of
Allen Keller Company. There are various components listed in
the bid proposal. The total as submitted by Allen Keller for
the total project bid price is $81,142. The second bid was
s-a-o6
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
50
submitted by MPB, Inc. Again, various components listed.
However, the total bid price on MPB, Inc. bid is $109,139.96.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, that's it? Can I see
I that?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's all I have.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we accept both bids and
refer them to Road and Bridge for recommendation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
acceptance of both bids and referral to Road and Bridge for
review and recommendation. Any question or discussion on the
motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JODGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard, do you come back in
two weeks? Or --
MR. ODOM: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We should have made an agenda
item today.
MR. ODOM: Well, it needs to be reviewed on who the
bidder is. We had -- we thought we'd have more bidders than
this right here. We put out a lot of packets. So --
5-8-Oti
51

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, two weeks? Or do we need
to get on this thing?
MR. ODOM: Well, can we just -- can we put it off
till this afternoon? What do you think? How much time do you
need to review this right here?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's not an agenda item.
JUDGE TINLEY: We can't -- I don't think we can
approve it anyway.
AUDIENCE: I think the award is good the 22nd.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, whatever.
JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, I am recessing the
Commissioners Court meeting of this date, and I am opening a
public hearing for preliminary revision of a plat for Lot 7
and Privilege Creek Road right-of-way, Privilege Creek
Ranches, as shown in Volume 7, Page 136 and 137, Plat Records.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed
at 10:05 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open
court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public
present here today that wishes to be heard on the preliminary
revision of a plat for Lot 7 and Privilege Creek Road
right-of-way in Privilege Creek Ranches, as shown in Volume 7,
Page 136 and -7 in the Plat Records? Any member of the public
wishing to be heard on that item? Seeing no one seeking
recognition, I will close the public hearing for the
5 8 0 h
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
52
preliminary revision of plat for Lot 7 and Privilege Creek
Road right-of-way in Privilege Creek Ranches, as shown in
Volume 7, Pages 136 and 137 of the Plat Records, and located
in Precinct 3.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:05 a.m., and
the regular Commissioners Court meeting was
reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on to the next item. I
will now reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting and call
Item 8, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
contracting with a consulting engineer for review of engineer
documents in the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and
Regulations. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let me hand out some additional
information.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got one?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I got one. I think I mentioned
last time, I have been in discussions with the engineer that's
handling the same type of work for Gillespie County, Mr. Wayne
Wells. He's in our audience today in the back. And I
received last night from Mr. Wells a -- a proposal, which is
pretty much what he and I discussed originally, to doing
contract work to review these documents at a rate of $35 an
hour, and then travel time is billed at $20 an hour plus the
standard I.R.S. amount for mileage reimbursement. The -- I'm
5-8-06
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~- 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
"" 2 4
25
53
I think he'd do a good job.
One, the contract. We
need to get a contract worked out with our -- through the
County Attorney's office. I think you need to look at the
proposal, see if Mr. Wells is -- also, we need to figure out
procedurally how we're going to handle this with our Road and
Bridge Department. We have not done this before, so we -- I
think it's something that we need to work out.
I don't think it's a -- a real time-urgent issue
from a platting standpoint, but the next agenda item does give
it a little bit of some importance; that is, with time
urgency, looking at some of our subdivision -- current -- I
guess our recently adopted requirements that need some
adjustment, I think. So, I don't know if we want to try to,
you know, hold off for two weeks and kind of work out the
details a little bit further, or I -- we probably could wait
on the next agenda item two weeks, or on the next agenda item,
I could -- you know, we authorize possibly, just for a minor
amount of money, several hours of his time to look through --
maybe five hours or something like that, to look through our
Subdivision Rules and get some guidance so we can get those
rules moving forward. And then in the interim two weeks, we
can work on an actual contract to get in place and figure out
s a-o6
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
how the details will work out. That's probably the
recommendation of the route that I'd like to go to keep us
moving forward. I believe we budgeted $5,000 for this
purpose.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Five, wasn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think we've taken that
money out of that budget. It was a line item for engineer
review, I think in the Road and Bridge budget -- or I'm not
sure, maybe the Commissioners Court budget.
MR. ODOM: It's 2,500.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 2,500?
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, there's funds budgeted for
this purpose, and so I think, you know -- well, does anyone
have any questions of Mr. Wells, or comments?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One question for him.
Where do you live?
MR. WELLS: Sir?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Where do you live?
MR. WELLS: I live in Fredericksburg.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What are the logistics that
you're concerned about?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've not talked with Leonard
about this at all, or Mr. Wells. So, that's the logistics
5-8-06
55
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
right there. The key is to look at our rules a little bit and
to figure out a time -- you know, we're under some state law
requirements that reviews do have to get fairly timely done.
We need to figure out -- and I only see this happening,
really, on larger subdivisions that we really require the
engineering, 'cause we don't require drainage studies, things
like that, if it's less than five lots, ten lots. I can't
remember what the number is in our new rules.
MR. ODOM: Three. I think it's three if it's less
than 20 acres. Then it has to be a drainage plan, if it's
less than 20 acres.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need to figure out time-wise
how long -- how we're going to get the documents from -- to
Len from the developer, to the Court through Road and Bridge,
up to Mr. Wells, and then what time we expect to get them
back. To allow time -- we just need to have some procedures,
I think, that everyone understands and is comfortable with, so
that we're not just, you know, having things left in limbo too
long. And I don't see that it's real hard. I think it's
something that if Mr. Wells, Len, and I would sit down 30
minutes, we could iron this out. And then, at the same time,
the County Attorney could be working on a contract.
JODGE TINLEY: Sure seems appropriate to me to have
some professional engineering expertise to work out -- help
you work out the kinks, the remaining kinks in the changes
S-A-Oti
56
1
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're making to our subdivision regulations. I think,
initially, that's very, very helpful, irrespective of the
contract.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think so. And I know
Mr. Wells has read our rules. I gave him the draft copy, and
he has -- so he's, you know, spent some time on it already.
That's why I'm real comfortable with, just initially, maybe
authorizing up to five hours of time for he and I to get
together and go over some of the road specifications and
drainage specifications, make sure that we have everything
correct. I know in the road specifications, we have some
problems. And then come back at the next meeting with an
actual long-term -- or, you know, I think it would be as
needed and at will, but more of a formal contract.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you said that he does
this same kind of work for the Gillespie County Commissioners
Court?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe that's correct. Is
that correct, Mr. Wells?
MR. WELLS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If he can work for them, he
can work for us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was kind of my attitude
when I first came across him.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If he can work for them, he
5-R-06
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
can -- he can work for anybody.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we
authorize myself to meet with Mr. Wells and Len Odom to work
out the details of how this would work, get with the County
Attorney on an agreement, and then authorize -- and in that
motion, authorize up to five hours of his time at $35 an hour
to do a review of our current rules.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are you sure you want to restrict
yourself to five hours? That may not be quite enough. I
don't see it as a real debilitating expenditure, and I'd hate
for that to kind of hang us up time-wise.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I think five hours should
be sufficient.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any
question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carried. Let's move to
Item 9, a companion item; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on modifications to road construction
standards in Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations. I
5 8-06
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
this as it was under the previous item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think they go hand-in-hand.
The consulting engineer, the problems we have, there's a
couple of things that have come up; traffic counts and how you
calculate traffic counts, and road grades and things of that
nature, and how either you work with some of the new -- I
mean, I don't see any change in the intent of our rules, but
they've become confusing in a few -- in two subdivisions that
have come up recently. So, I just think it woula be wise,
before we do the final version, to spend a little bit of time
looking at those minor points, and I can either bring them
back to the Court if I think there's substantive changes, or I
previously was authorized just to go ahead and make a few
minor	changes,	as long as	we're not changing	the intent.	That
way,	we can get	the rules	-- hopefully, final	version --	out
to the public. And I don't know that we need a motion after
what we did with the last one.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think so. Any further action
discuss, and take appropriate action for a concept plan of
Falls Ranch located in Precinct 3.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Before I turn it over to Len, as
I previously noted, this involves some of my property, and
I'll abstain from voting. I have filed an appropriate
-e oh
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
affidavit with the County Clerk related to my interest in this
development.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes. Good morning, Judge. This -- the
engineer is here and will be presenting this. This is a
concept plan for Privilege Creek Road. This is up at Kendall
County line and our line, and it was proposed before; we had
been before the Court talking about connecting Lane Valley
Road to -- I think that's Turkey Knob Road; is that correct?
Or --
MR. KOLACNY: Lane Valley.
MR. ODOM: -- Ranger Creek, something like that,
coming out of Boerne right there. So, I'll at this time turn
it over to Ken to present this. Should I set this up on here,
maybe? All right, here we go.
MR. KOLACNY: Good morning, Judge, Commissioners.
Thank you, Mr. Odom. My name's Ken Kolacny with Matkin-Hoover
Engineering. I'm representing the Falls Ranch development. I
know you all have copies of this concept plan in front of you,
but I thought I'd mount this up here so we could all look at
it. Basically, what we're proposing is a high-end,
low-density residential development. It's on the eastern edge
of Kerr County, bordering with Kendall County. And we are
proposing basically two different -- two different types of
residential developments, one being a larger lot -- like, 12-
s-s-o~
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to 30-acre lots, something large enough to maintain wildlife
exemption and so forth, and then in the -- the higher -- top
of the ridges with the better views and everything, we're
proposing 5- to 10-acre lots, which will be similar to, like,
The Reserve development, where they're clustered more on the
there.
As this table shows here, there's -- we're proposing
approximately 70 of the smaller lots and 130 of the larger, a
total of approximately 200 lots on 2,200 acres. And that
gives you a density of -- actually, an average lot size of
approximately 11 acres per lot, which, as you know, is well
above the 5-acre requirement. And what we've done is
highlighted in yellow the portion of the 2,200 acres that's in
Kendall County, just so everybody knows that that's proposing
that as future development. We want to focus on the Kerr
County part of it right now, and -- and deal with Kendall
County later. And then, as far as traffic, like Mr. Odom
said, this would be the extension of Turkey Knob, which is
currently Privilege Lane, which, as y'all know, is a private
country lane street, which would be basically upgraded to an
arterial street, and ending right here. This right here is
the division, or the outer boundary of the current Privilege
Creek Ranches, which, you know, that previous agenda item, Lot
7 is in. Basically, I've shown this line here to delineate it
s a-o6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
61
from the rest of the development. And we have Lane Valley
Road being extended from the northwest as an arterial road
also to this point, and we've made a point there to end each
road in cul-de-sacs at that division line. We don't want to
be presumptive in assuming that those two roads definitely can
be connected, but we're -- we want to proceed with this
development from both sides. Each one can stand on its own.
And, overall, it's going to be a real nice -- nice development
there. I'll answer any questions that y'all might have.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: There -- it's individual
water wells and septic tanks?
MR. KOLACNY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What's the size of Lot
Number 5?
MR. KOLACNY: Lot Number 5 -- oh, that would be
existing -- yeah, that would be an existing lot in the
Privilege Creek Ranches, and I believe that is around 5 acres.
This -- Privilege Creek Ranches, by the way, would be vacated
and replatted to correlate with our proposed development,
basically.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You said the average lot size
was 11-something acres?
MR. KOLACNY: Overall, over the total 2,200 acres.
With, like I said, the two different types of developments,
the larger one being -- being about 15 acres per lot and the
5-3-OE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
62
smaller being 7 acres per lot. And that has to do with the
fact that the topography just doesn't allow for more density
than that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Works well.
MR. KOLACNY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's the kind of
development I think we like to see.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Large acreage, upscale,
puts more taxable property on the rolls.
JUDGE TINLEY: You don't have anything less than
5 acres? No lot less than 5 acres?
MR. KOLACNY: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you saying an extension
of Lane Valley Road?
MR. KOLACNY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that what you were
saying?
MR. KOLACNY: Correct. It would be extended as an
arterial with at least a 90-foot right-of-way. We may even
bump that up to 100 foot so it could be extended in the
future, or widened or anything like that in the future, if
need be.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What kind of motion do we
need here? Just accept the concept plan? I move to accept
-a-o6
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
the concept plan.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to accept
the concept plan as presented. Any question or discussion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Nicholson
voted in favor of the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let the record reflect that
Commissioner Letz abstained.
MR. KOLACNY: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 11, if we might.
Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to have the
1978 "Simplified Method to Establish Base Flood Elevations"
for Kerr County updated, and consider a workshop on
floodplain.
MR. ODOM: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Thank you. What I'm proposing before the
Court is updating the Simplified Methods which was done in
1978 by Colonel Bernie Bruns, and it's something that we use
in the rural area. It is a study that I think needs to be
updated to have the most current available information. That
s-o on
1
~. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
--- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
64
cost will run me $17,900, or approximately $17,500. I have
$9,000 in Flood Damages, and I'm asking the Court to consider
us to spend these funds and the remainder out of Flood
might work together and not to duplicate services, and have
detailed studies in Zone A, those unstudied areas that have
And I wanted to look
down into Town Creek, and then eventually look from Ingram,
the other side where the detailed studies that FEMA's done,
and to move toward Hunt, maybe the north fork. But I wanted
y'all's input to look at areas, tributaries that feed into the
Guadalupe that haven't been studied. And I think that if we
do this, that in the next three to four years, FEMA's going to
come in. We can add that to their -- to the study that
they're proposing to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard, what does the City of
Kerrville do? Do they handle floodplain totally internally?
They have their own department?
MR. ODOM: They have their own department. As a
matter of fact, they're out -- putting out now for an engineer
to do roads and floodplain. That's what we saw in the paper.
s-a-o6
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
65
So, there is an individual totally that's going to be doing
that right there with the city.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It seems -- is the mayor still
here, or did he leave? It seems that's an area that
interlocal agreement may work very well. I mean, we're doing
it right now. I don't see why we would have two sets of rules
that -- two people doing it, basically, in the county. That
may be something that we want to explore with the City, to --
if they'd be interested in contracting with us. Maybe we
could add a little -- some additional personnel and get the --
kind of as a -- you know, an expanded program. I think it's
very important for the county. It's something that may help
save tax dollars overall if we had only one entity doing it in
the county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard, to -- to have a base
plan and to know and understand and have all that information
that you're talking about, how does that benefit the taxpayers
of Kerr County?
MR. ODOM: Well, it helps reduce -- keep them from
doing a detailed study. If it's an unstudied area, you can
take a look at -- this method that we have is a simplified
method; gives you watershed, gives you drainage area, versus
the square -- square mile or feed. So, it is a simple thing
that's designed for Kerr County, and it tells us that
elevation off the stream. Otherwise, you would have to have
s e-oe
66
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
an engineer come in for a detailed study to do some
cross-sections, and that could run $8,000 to $12,000. It can
even go higher, depending where you're at and how much feed
you've got to look at that. So, it is a method in which
someone wishes to -- to save some money. And that's the
purpose of floodplain, is to make it safer, that they can get
insurance, and in a method that's the most available
information, either from the feds or from the state, which
T.C.E.Q. doesn't really have anything. FEMA has a detailed
study, and all they use is contours, and those contours could
or could not be right. In some cases, they're not right. And
in a rural area, this simplified method is a process that's
very simple to get the square miles of feed and that relates
to this curve, how much water above that stream. So, it's a
simplified method to keep those homes away from the water and
try to get them up in a reasonable manner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, could it possibly affect
the flood tax rate for a citizen?
MR. ODOM: Well, that's the reason I would like to
do this latter part that I said. I would like to study more
and more of the "A" areas, all of us; Kerrville, Ingram, all
of us look at this, and what's reasonable of the growth. And
if we have detailed studies, I think that the community rating
system, we might be able to move up in that rating system,
which would reduce our insurance here. That is one method of
s-a-o~
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
doing it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Is this something that
U.G.R.A. should be doing instead of Kerr County?
MR. ODOM: I'll be more than happy to allow -- I
think it's something that should be explored, as Commissioner
Letz said, whether it's with the City or whether it's U.G.R.A.
They're a taxing entity; they do work on the water.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that was originally
done when Colonel Bruns was head of the U.G.R.A.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My question follows up on
what Commissioner Letz was talking about. Is the process
that's used or methodology used by the City different than the
one you're currently using?
MR. ODOM: I'm not quite sure. I -- I haven't
worked with them. I -- the system that I'm proposing for
17,000 will not work in an urban area. It is designed for a
rural area; it's a totally different situation. There's --
there's bridges, there's a lot of things that raises that
level. And this is not -- even under 44, on the floodplain
that FEMA works on, it's not the -- using the simplified
method. You're probably going into a detailed study, then, to
the cities. In most cases, they probably have it, but in
their ET J, they probably don't have it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, are there any creeks
5-8-OF
68
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
that the City would examine that don't start someplace in the
county first?
MR. ODOM: I'm -- ask me again?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are there any creeks that
the City would be looking at for base flood elevations that
don't originate someplace else in the county?
MR. ODOM: No. No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't think so.
MR. ODOM: But they would have something like Town ~.
Creek. Development's going to start there. You've got
tributaries -- as a matter of fact, Headwaters should be
interested in this. U.G.R.A. really should be interested in
this, because I believe, talking to Gordon Morgan, that
even -- and I may be wrong, but the impression I got is that
there's a lot of water from -- feed from tributaries that we
don't get credit for, as far as surface water amount, and it's
going downstream. So, I think that Headwaters, U.G.R.A., the
City of Kerrville, us, we should all have an interest in
looking at studying these "A" areas and how much runoff, and
to see if we can get more credit for the amount of water we
got up here. I think in some cases, we're not getting credit
for the runoff that goes into the Guadalupe. I don't know.
Don't ask me; I'm just telling you what I think. So, to be
explicit --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Don't ask.
5-2-06
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It seems to me that we're
talking about two different things here, spending some funds
to do a study --
MR. ODOM: For me, right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- and having a workshop. It
just seems to me that we definitely need to have the workshop
with other entities, and then talk about expending funds and
how much funds. 'Cause it may be that other entities would
like to cough up some bread.
MR. ODOM: I would agree. But this -- it will be a
larger amount than this 17,000. This 17,000 would still work,
whether -- whomever may do it. I think that you -- we need to
update that 1978 data, and that's what this 17,440 is for.
The other's going to be a greater amount, and I think we
should all be involved. I think we should all be discussing
it anyway to see how we cannot duplicate that effort.
JUDGE TINLEY: The area to be studied on this
proposal for 17,000, are you saying that the U.G.R.A., the
Headwaters, and the City would not have any interest in?
MR. ODOM: No, they should have an interest in it.
They should have an interest in it. I believe that they
should.
JUDGE TINLEY: It appears to me like we might get
some participation --
MR. ODOM: Possibility that they would do that.
5-e-oe
70
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
JUDGE TINLEY: -- from those entities, then.
MR. ODOM: But that would be -- that has nothing to
do -- well, it may be on the 17,000, might have that. Maybe.
But I would like to move forward. Some of that stalls in
negotiation.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I like the idea of getting
at least the City and the U.G.R.A. to sit down with us, and --
MR. ODOM: I even think Headwaters would have an
I interest.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Headwaters possibly, too.
It's my recollection that U.G.R.A. brings in about $800,000 a
year, I think, in taxes.
MR. ODOM: Three and a half percent, I think,
something like that, of taxes.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: They should have a keen
interest in the outcome of this kind of study. So, it just
makes sense, before we -- we go off on our own, we sit down
with them and find out what their interest is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the original -- the
letter that Mr. Bruns sent out in 1978 to Turner, Collie and
Braden talked about the need to do that for flood insurance
studies of the City of Kerrville and the unincorporated areas
of Kerr County, so that was the basic reason why they did it.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know what credit
5-B 06
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
you're talking about for flow, whether you're talking about
stream flow.
MR. ODOM: I just got the -- there was some areas
off Scenic Hill and Scenic Valley that I was told that they've
never looked at, and that those flows are there. And that
that goes down into the Guadalupe, and my understanding, the
State doesn't consider some of that. If that is the case up
there off Scenic Hills and Scenic Valley, I'm sure there's
other feeds, too, that are -- that we're getting water, and
apparently that it's in our best interests to -- to
investigate that to see if we could have more water rights.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would be greatly surprised
if the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority didn't measure the
flow from all sources coming out of Kerr County down the
county line.
MR. ODOM: I'm just telling you what I heard.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- I mean, to me, it
seems that the first step is for you to contact Headwaters,
U.G.R.A., City of Kerrville, and see if they have an interest
in joining us on the study. And if they do, offer to set up a
workshop, or y'all get together and come back with a proposal
for us to look at. I mean, we can do either format. I don't
know if we have to have a workshop; I think it can be handled,
really, by Eugene Williams, Ray Buck, and whoever the City
designates. Need to come up with a proposal and then take it
5-8-OH
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to the entities for funding.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's what I want to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we need to do a full
workshop, we can do that, but I think the first step is for
you to visit with them.
MR. ODOM: I will contact them. But are we saying
that we're going to separate this 17,990 out? It's something
that I think -- it's a tool that I'm doing right now. I think
I would like to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't understand how -- what ~~
the -- getting the other entities involved would expand the
17,400, and I don't see why we would start it until we knew if
they were going to join us or not.
MR. ODOM: Right.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Leonard, I have a couple of
other unrelated issues that I'd like to talk with U.G.R.A.
about helping us with, so if you decide to meet with Mr. Buck,
I wouldn't mind being invited to that.
MR. ODOM: All right, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on that particular
agenda item? Why don't we take our mid-morning recess? We'll
stand in recess until a quarter till.
(Recess taken from 10:33 a.m. to 10:49 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if we
5 3 0 6
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
might. Next item on the agenda is Item Number 12; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action for Road and Bridge to
purchase a ditch bucket attachment.
MR. ODOM: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Thank you, Judge. We recently leased two
new backhoes, and would like to purchase a new ditch bucket
attachment to use with them. And that's just one bucket. It
will cost approximately $1,500. Because we made good buys on
the capital purchases this year, we still have the funds
available in Capital Outlay, but this item was not on the list
of approved items for the current budget; therefore, we need
your permission to purchase the ditch bucket to be used on
these two machines. I'm open for any questions. Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Boy-dummy question of the
day.
MR. ODOM: All right, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is a ditch bucket?
MR. ODOM: Well, a ditch bucket is something -- what
we ordered was around a 36-inch bucket we thought would work,
but it had steel teeth on it. We thought that bucket -- we
could remove the teeth, but it doesn't; it's welded to it.
And a ditch bucket is a smooth angle across there. In other
words, it -- in a high concentrated area like your area and
all, where there's a lot of driveways and all, we need
5-R-06
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
L1
22
23
24
25
74
something that's got a smooth edge to it, there's no teeth on
it. And that's what this would give us. The same thing as a
grade-all bucket.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. ODOM: Smooth -- a smooth blade across that.
I -- Mr. Letz is smiling at me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was just going to give him a
cheaper alternative, but I'll keep my mouth shut.
MR. ODOM: What is that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Put a plate across the teeth.
MR. ODOM: We heard that one and we thought about
it, but I --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you'd have to put it on
and off all the time, but that's --
MR. ODOM: We don't want to be cutting on that edge.
That cutting edge is a smooth edge compared to what I've got,
and those teeth are welded on. If we thought we could unbolt
them, I'd make it work, and we even discussed about putting
that -- but there's -- we'd have to drill through. And -- you
know, that's Aggie engineering at its best. And I think that
we would be better -- we'd have a better job, particularly
where there's a large concentration of people, to have the
same thing that I have with the Gradall, have a smooth edge --
cutting edge on that thing.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard, you mentioned my
5-8-06
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
precinct	and my precinct	only,	so I move for approval of this
item.			
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does that mean we can't use
it in my precinct?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't say that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to
Item 13; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
abandon, vacate, and discontinue approximately 95 feet of
Drummond Drive, as recorded in the Kerr County Subdivision
Records and in Volume 4, Page 111, Plat Records, and located
in Precinct 1.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. This is a portion of Drummond
and extends approximately 95 feet. It is -- the property is
owned by Mr. Jons on both sides. This is a process which is
under 251 in the Transportation Code. We also have a way that
we normally do it under the Governmental Code, but this
accomplishes the same thing. We're trying to get -- to
abandon that 95 feet that we don't need to maintain, and it
5-8-OE
76
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
does it in a manner which will save money. We didn't have to
put it out for notice and mailing or anything like that. So,
I recommend that we abandon, by 251 here, that 95 feet. And
I've also gone through legal, and legal has said that this is
an appropriate way to do it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval as
described in the backup material here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item as indicated in the backup material
furnished to the Court. Any question or discussion on the
motion?
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: This order -- have you looked at this
order that's been tendered?
MR. EMERSON: I don't believe so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Why don't you take a quick look at
I it?
MR. EMERSON: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any question or discussion on the
motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
s-a-o6
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Mr. Jons, the
order which you tendered has been submitted to the County
attorney. If he finds that in due form, why, that's the one
we'll enter. If there's any question, why, of course, he'll
get back with you.
MR. DONS: Thank you, Your Honor.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are there any other items on that
particular agenda item? Next item; consider, discuss, and
take appropriate action concerning the bid award to Martin
Marietta Materials for cold mix and black base. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. We'd sent out a summary
before, I think, last budget on the annual bids that were
awarded in Court Order 29629, and in response to that mailing,
we received the attached letter from Martin Marietta
explaining an error in their bid, which is in that agenda
material that we sent you on this item. Therefore, we ask the
Court to change the award of the bid of cold mix and black
base to Vulcan instead of Martin Marietta.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve
the request by the Road and Bridge Administrator with
reference to the bid award to Martin Marietta Materials for
cold mix and black base. Any question or discussion on the
motion?
5-b Of
78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm going to have to
think about this for a minute. But do we just automatically
change it? Or do we rescind the previous order? Seems like
there would be more to it than just changing a name.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought about that in my -- I
actually don't think we need to do anything. I mean, I think,
because we accept all bids, and you have the discretion to go
on down the line, their line just went up, so the next low one
is that. So, I mean, I think we could do it that way.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Except the previous court
order said to "award" the bid.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And Martin Marietta -- it
was awarded to Martin Marietta for cold mix and black base.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actual order? Well, we
awarded bids to everybody. I think Commissioner Letz is on
the right track. 'Cause we -- we accept all the bids,
probably for this very reason.
MR. ODOM: For this reason, for backup.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Whatever. What do you think?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I'd like to hear from
the County Attorney.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's not a big deal. I mean,
we -- if we feel like we need to clean it up, we just rescind
5 8 0 6
79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the old order, and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That -- yeah, right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- go on with life. Or do we
need to do that at all?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the -- what's the agenda
say?
JUDGE TINLEY: The award from -- the bid from Martin
Marietta as to those two items did not specify f.o.b. their
yard or point of origin, did they?
MR. ODOM: No, it was f.o.b. Kerrville.
JUDGE TINLEY: Kerrville being a --
MR. ODOM: 25-mile radius. 25-mile radius of that.
That's the way we had that. Not down there in San Antonio.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let -- let me rephrase my
motion, if I might, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we --
based on Martin Marietta changing their price after we awarded
the bids, we cancel the award to Martin Marietta and award the
bid for cold mix and black base to the next low bidder, which
is Vulcan Materials.
MR. ODOM: That's correct. Does that sound
appropriate? Without rescinding a court order? Just amend
it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That canceled the --
s a-oc
80
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
MR. ODOM: The award.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To Martin Marietta.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We do have a motion. Do I
hear a second?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to
Item 15; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
concerning the Manufactured Home Rental Communities Rules, how
they apply to property at 150 Lydick, and the possibility of a
variance from the same. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Recently, the Howards had
bought some property, a little bit over 2 acres, at the end of
Lydick. When they purchased the property, there was a house
and one manufactured home rental on the property. They
proposed to -- I believe in the house, they were going to make
their office. They moved in another manufactured home, and
when they applied for a septic permit to add two manufactured
homes to the lot, they were told by Environmental Health that
they needed to check with about the rules for a rental
s-e-oo
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
81
community. They use the house for an office, rent one
manufactured home, and are asking the Court for a variance to
rent the second home without platting as a manufactured home
rental community. So, that's -- they asked to be put on.
So, I've given you supporting documents. Basically,
it says just in the rules -- the definitions, 1.02, the
Manufactured Rental Home Community says that means a plot or
tract of land that is separated into two or more spaces or
lots that are rented, leased, or offered for rent or lease for
a term of less than 60 months without a purchase option for
the installation of manufactured homes for use and occupancy
as residences. You also have some minutes of a meeting that I
think that Judge Henneke was involved in, and where that
question came up. And I think, specifically, if it's two or
more, then you'd have to comply to the rules. But I will turn
that at this time to the Howards -- or Mr. Howard here that
wishes to address the Court.
MR. HOWARD: Yeah. I was just wanting to -- what he
was saying, if we can have a variance. We don't want to put
no more mobile homes on there, just what we got.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have two on there
already?
MR. HOWARD: Yeah. One's rented, and we moved one
on there to be rented.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, that would mean that
5-8-Oti
U2
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
there -- that that is a rental community. Is that what you're
saying, Leonard?
MR. ODOM: That's by the rules. By the definition,
that's what it says.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's pretty clear. I
mean, we haven't given a variance from this in the past; I
don't think we grant a variance here. My personal opinion.
JUDGE TINLEY: In looking at the -- the
Commissioners Court order on Manufactured Home Rental
Communities, if there's authority to grant a variance, I don't
see it contained in that order.
MR. HOWARD: I didn't know if it makes any
difference, but the one mobile home's been surrendered to the
property, so there is no title on it or anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If they're rented, they're
subject to the provisions, as I read the article -- order.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if the Judge is looking
at the -- the rules, and it does -- it does -- you're thinking
it does not give us the authority to grant a variance?
JUDGE TINLEY: A quick review of it does not
indicate that. I don't want to say I've made an exhaustive
review, but --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, even if it did, I'm
reluctant to grant a variance of this -- of this kind, because
once you start granting variances in this -- in this arena, I
-a-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
83
mean, why have rules?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Commissioner, I -- my
reading of it is the rules do apply in this case, and it would
take a variance. But I also see that the rules are very
restrictive. What public interest is served by disallowing
putting two rental properties on this -- on this property?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- the interest is,
it's just a -- where do you draw the line? And the state law
says you draw it at two. We basically adopted state law. I
mean, I think I can certainly argue your point of view, but I
think when you -- okay, what about 10? What about 15? You
know, and that's why they said two or more. It's kind of a --
modeled very much after our Subdivision Rules, where certain
i provisions are applicable, and the idea was just to keep, you
know, substandard developments from starting in this county or
any other county. And nothing against this particular one,
but I think that's the reason for it. And we spent --
unfortunately, Kerr County was the test case that went -- was
appealed and filed a lawsuit against us by the state
association, and the -- what we have is a compromise from that
lawsuit. So --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Generally, our Subdivision
Rules have got some basis set in protecting the public health,
protecting the water, conserving water, safety with regards to
driveway access, to roads and things like that. I get back to
s-s-oe
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
84
the same -- maybe the rules could or should be different.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's --
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I agree they apply, but
that may be just too restrictive.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's the same as roads and same
as drainage, you know. It's the same, I think, requirement
that you come up with as to why you do it. You make sure the
roads are to a standard for both the public and the emergency
services, things of that nature, and also with the drainage
from a public safety --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If it were a county rule, I
would probably vote with you on that. But, I mean, we -- we
can get our hands around Harvey's neck, I guess, and get him
to change that -- that type thing, but that's -- you know, if
it's state law, it's state law.
JUDGE TINLEY: County Attorney's --
MR. EMERSON: In talking to Mr. Jons, I think
there's a -- a legitimate legal issue on the abandoned title
of that one residence, whether it still qualifies under the
manufactured home rentals. And until I can do some research,
I can't tell you one way or another if it fits.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's -- you know, if it
doesn't apply, I mean, if this isn't applicable, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What are you saying?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait two weeks.
5-8-OH
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. EMERSON: Manufactured homes are titled, kind of
like a car, okay? They come with a -- with a title. And if
the title's abandoned and the manufactured home is affixed to
the property, essentially, it becomes a fixture, practically
speaking.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And that's what he's
saying?
MR. EMERSON: Right. In this particular situation,
I do not know how the Attorney General has interpreted that
for purposes of this statute.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, if that goes away, then
there's just one -- one home there on that property -- or one
manufactured home on that property, and there's no reason for
this guy to be in this building.
MR. EMERSON: Correct. But I can't give you an
answer till I have time to go research the issue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, he's saying that there'd be
one rented home and one rented manufactured home, and that's
not --
JUDGE TINLEY: Depends on how -- how "manufactured
home" is construed. The definitions in the court order itself
do not define a manufactured home, so we've got to go back to
other -- other legal sources, and that's what the County
Attorney is suggesting that we need to look at.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Still alive.
5 8-On
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
86
MR. HOWARD: So, what do we do now?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're going to wait on --
and so we're going to wait on Rex to make a legal decision.
MR. HOWARD: Okay. So, does he contact me, or do we
need to come back or what?
JUDGE TINLEY: I guess the collateral issue would be
if -- if you've got a mobile home park and you can avoid the
applicability of this by just killing the titles on all the --
all the units there.
MR. EMERSON: That's the magic question.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody have anything else to offer?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I need to address this
thing. Probably, this issue will not be addressed for two
more weeks --
MR. HOWARD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- from today.
MR. HOWARD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you can call and probably
visit with Rex to find out what he has -- you know, so you'll
know what's going to happen.
MR. HOWARD: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on that agenda item?
Let's move to Item 16, if we might. Consider, discuss, and
take appropriate action to review revision of plat for Lots 19
and 20 of Hidden Hills as set forth in Volume 6, Page 362 of
5 - 8 - 0 h
87
1
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 Plat Records, and set a public hearing for same.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What precinct is this in?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Last time I checked, it was
in Precinct 2.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
~, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But it doesn't tell you
I that.
MR. ODOM: I'm sorry. We -- I believe this one came
in at 3 o'clock or something like that. Yes, we had a -- we
had 11, and we tried to make sure, and I missed this one here,
because we had to pencil it in.
JUDGE TINLEY: Basically, what you're needing is a
public hearing on this?
MR. ODOM: Pardon me?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mainly, what you're needing is a
public hearing?
MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. This is combining two
lots into one and making 80 acres in 19-A, is what -- we're
revising two lots into one, is what this is about. And we ask
that the -- we set a public hearing for June 12, 2006, at 10
a.m. And then also, the final plat, this is -- vocabulary is
a difficult thing with Don Voelkel sometimes. "Revision" does
not get in his mind; it's "as revised." And so the final plat
will show "revision" instead of "as revised." I had to throw
that in. I'm sorry.
5 8-0 a,
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Just a minor Aggie skirmish we have
going on?
MR. ODOM: Well, there's always an Aggie skirmish,
it seems like.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This would work just if you
take "a-s" out of it, as. "As platted and revised."
MR. ODOM: He's -- I don't know why he cannot change
the language.
~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're not going to even get
in an English debate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just handle it this way.
Tell him the Commissioners Court wants it done right.
MR. ODOM: I already told him that. This came in at
3 o'clock on Friday, and I was gone. It was Monday morning
when we started looking at it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Get it straight.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move we set a public
hearing --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're going to do it anyway.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- for the revision of plat
for Lots 19 and 20, Hidden Hills, which is located in Precinct
2, for June 12. 10 a.m.?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to vote no, 'cause
I want the verbiage on the plat correct.
5-8-Oh
89
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L2
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And correct the verbiage.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not sure what I'm voting
on.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And correct the verbiage.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not sure what I'm voting
i on.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What verbiage? Just that
I one?
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're	voting on	a public
hearing,	aren't we?		
	JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.		
	COMMISSIONER LETZ: To revise som	e plats.	
	JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion.	Do I have	a second?
	COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.		
	JUDGE TINLEY: Motion and second	to hold a	public
hearing	on the agenda item for June 12, thi	s year, at	10 a.m.
Any question or discussion on the motion?	All in fav	or of the
motion,	signify by raising your right hand.		
	(The motion carried by unanimous	vote.)	
	JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same	sign.	
	(No response.)		
	JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let'	s move to
I Item 17.
COMMISSIONER LETZ
can I make a brief comment?
Before we leave on that, Judge,
s a-o6
90
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
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seems to me our rules say that
they have to provide this 21 days --
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- ahead of time. And I think
-- I understand that there's a certain amount of pressure, and
that they try to accommodate the developers, and I appreciate
that. And -- but, you know, I think that the -- I have no
problem with you setting up a policy that -- that's pretty
absolute that -- I think 21 days is a little bit long,
personally; I don't think it takes that long for you to review
something like this, which is pretty simple, but I also think
that coming in on a Friday or a Monday, like you have had
several on this agenda, is -- is not appropriate either.
MR. ODOM: It's not appropriate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I think I don't have a
problem at all, you know, Wednesday or something like that,
before --
MR. ODOM: Within reason. But I understand, too,
with Mr. Wells here, that's something -- we'll discuss this.
And there needs to be that timeline, and I don't know where
that timeline's at that's reasonable that he can review some
drainage plans before the preliminaries are given.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think that -- I think
every subdivision isn't the same. I mean, clearly, putting on
5-R-06
91
1
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 request for a public hearing is a lot less work than it is
to --
MR. ODOM: Or a concept plan.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or a concept plan is less work.
But it's -- compared to a preliminary plat on a large
subdivision, I think it takes -- clearly, 21 days is probably
going to be rushing your department. So, I think that -- you
know, I want to bring this up. I think you have the ability
to not rush these on. But I know as soon as you do that,
whoever it is, whether it's Mr. Voelkel or any other developer
or surveyor in the community, we're going to hear about it.
We need to be able to support it.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: I might mention that if you -- if you
do decide to adopt a hard and fast policy, you might consider
sending out written notification of, "Henceforth, these are
the timelines, and we're not going to be making any
exceptions," with maybe a brief explanation that we've got
certain tasks that have to be performed that we need, and even
just getting it on the agenda is not a simple task. I
remember Ms. Hardin coming in, and she had a cardboard box
full of these things.
MR. ODOM: Box full, that's correct. It is very
difficult for us to make all the copies and do everything and
try to catch it. This next one, I missed Precinct 2 on it,
-a-oF
92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
too. But we've gone through and tried to -- we -- we go a
week ahead of time trying to get all this together, and then
the last minute on stuff -- I had one at 10 o'clock on Tuesday
morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, you're absolutely
correct. We're all correct here. But this is not the first
time we've had this conversation. That's the reason we built
the time frame in the rules, was because -- the only way to
make that stand and to get -- is shut them down. Do not take
them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They get the picture real
quick that way.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've got a sign that was very
graciously given to me by a now deceased former member of this
Court that says, "What part of 'no' do you not understand?"
Maybe I can bring -- bring that out and dust it off a little.
We have a motion and a second -- no we don't; we concluded
that. Let's go on to Item 17. Consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to review revision of plat for Lot 25 of
Twin Springs Ranch, Section II, as set out in Volume 7, Page
167 of the Plat Records. There's a parenthetical, "Creekwood
Section II-A, Volume 6, Page 106, and set a public hearing for
same.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well --
5-6-06
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
93
JUDGE TINLEY: Located in Precinct 2?
MR. ODOM: Precinct 2.
MS. HARDIN: And 3.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And 3.
MR. ODOM: And 3.
JUDGE TINLEY: What you're asking today for is a
public hearing?
MR. ODOM: What am I -- yes. Accept as a
preliminary and a public hearing. But there's some questions
I have to the Court on how we would go about it, whether it
was an alternate plat process or preliminary plat process.
This was submitted under the alternate plat process. Lot 25
of Twin Springs Ranch II, Volume 7, Page 167, will be divided
into four parts. One part is to be added to the Creekwood
II-A subdivision, Volume 6, Page 106, and in order to
accomplish this, the portion of Lot 25-A to be added to
Creekwood II-A needs to be vacated from Twin Springs Ranch II.
The other three parcels will remain in Twin Springs Ranch and
numbered 25-A, -B, and -C. If it is done under the alternate
plat process, they will not be required to send letters to the
other landowners, just do the publication and have a public
hearing and final plat approval. If it's done as a
preliminary and final plat process, they are required to pay
more fees and send letters to the landowners of both
subdivisions. With all this in mind, do we accept this as a
s a-oh
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
94
preliminary and set the public hearing, or do we do it as an
alternate plat and set the public hearing as June 12, 2006, at
10:10 a.m.?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, there -- there's a
reason for notifying everybody. And we probably -- the way I
see it, we could probably not notify anybody and sneak this
thing through, or we can notify all the taxpayers and their
neighbors to let them know what's going on in their community
and allow them to have a voice. I mean, that's the way I see
it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Leonard --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not a big fan of sneaking
it through, to be honest with you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Leonard and I met with
Mr. Voelkel --
~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Which one?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Lee -- on this item. And
they -- the other property owners in Twin Springs -- is it
two, Leonard?
MR. ODOM; Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In Twin Springs have, in
fact, signed off on this, and they are -- there's a
declaration of all of that. And all the other property owners
have -- have signed off on that. That's included in your
packet. I guess the real question is, does it come under the
5-8-06
95
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
alternate plat review or does it come under -- does the Court
want to take it on as a whole? 'Cause this property's going
to be taken out of one subdivision and put into another.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you -- it can't be in two
subdivisions. So, I mean, both subdivisions have to be
addressed. As I understand, that piece over here that's in
Twin Springs Ranches -- or it's in Creekwood right now?
Whichever one it's in.
MR. ODOM: No, it's in Twin Springs right now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In Twin Springs now. It's got
to be removed from Twin Springs before it can be put into
Creekwood.
MR. ODOM: It's just got to be abandoned.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what this is about,
removing it from Twin Springs, and it will ultimately come
back to us as a part of Creekwood.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But the initial -- it's
a revision of the plat. First part of it is just deleting it
and -- you know, from Creekwood. And there's another public
hearing to add it as a revision of plat to bring it into
Creekwood.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Deleting it from Twin
Springs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the first action, to me.
That has to be done. Once it's deleted, then it can be added
5-8-06
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
96
to the other one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, two different actions need
to be taken.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. And one of them we
discussed does that first one, the removal of it from Twin
Springs. That can be done under the alternate plat review
process. But the second one we know cannot be done under the
alternate plat process. The adding it to Creekwood cannot be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I think you probably
can do it under the -- it can be removed from Twin Springs
under the alternate plat process. You're just deleting a lot.
Is it a single lot? Well --
MR. ODOM: Portion of this 25. One portion of about
125 acres.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- you're revising a lot and --
and subdivision boundary, 'cause it's on the perimeter of the
subdivision. But --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then you're changing the
boundaries of the --
MR. ODOM: Creekwood II.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, the first subdivision.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, do you notify all the
properties in there -- property owners in there that they --
5-8-06
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
97
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They've already been
notified. They've already signed off on it.
MR. ODOM: Right. Twin Springs has done a petition
to allow them to do this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, the alternate -- what is
different in the -- what's different about the alternate plat
process?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The -- you don't need to go
through the public hearing process. Is that correct?
', MR. ODOM: You still have to go through the public
i~
~ hearing, but you don't have to send out notification.
i COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you don't -- you're
telling me you don't have to send them out anyway, because
II they're -- everybody's already signed off on it, so what's the
question here?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good question.
MR. ODOM: Well, Creekwood is going to be going --
it's totally separate. You're going to take a portion -- Twin
Springs, if I had my druthers, I would take it out of it, have
less traffic on one side. Now, you're going to take 25 and
you're going to put it in another subdivision, and the
question is, has Creekwood II been notified? Have they
accepted -- can you -- can we do that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, the answer to your
question is no, the Creekwood II people have not been. Twin
s-~-vs
98
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
Springs people have been.
MR. ODOM: I understand.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the question, to me,
that I heard that occurs to me, following up on Commissioner
Baldwin, is does this -- what if we did it under the alternate
plat process? We've got a piece of property just hanging in
limbo.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's not in one and it
hasn't been determined to put it in the second.
MR. ODOM: In the second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What if the second property I
owner says, "Absolutely not. We're not going to have that
over here." What do you do then?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, he has to come back to
us on putting it into Creekwood.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there's going to be a
bunch of them come out of the woodwork to talk about roads and
-- and traffic and whatever.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm going back to a question,
and I'm looking, going -- reading quickly through the rules.
The fact that that's an alternate plat process doesn't relieve
the public hearing.
MR. ODOM: No.
5-8-06
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
ZZ
23
24
25
99
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, public notification.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Notification by letter.
MR. ODOM: Notification to Creekwood II is something
that I question. You're taking one and trying to put it in
another subdivision. If we're trying to do this as one piece,
would not Twin Springs and Creekwood II need to be notified of
the public hearing set in June? Or -- or --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you have to notify the
public, I think that notice has to be for both of them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If it were me, I would do it
that way, especially if they're going to pack the courtroom
and start talking about roads. Let them know --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, when you and I met,
the issue -- the secondary or the second part of this was not
discussed in terms of -- of the Creekwood part. All that he
j was asking to do was to take action to remove it from Twin
i Springs. He said he was going to make it a part of Creekwood,
but that notification hasn't taken place.
MR. ODOM: All right. What do you do -- where is
this piece of land that's in limbo?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think I just raised that
question.
MR, ODOM: Is it in paradise? We're going to just
set it out here? The question is, once you divide this, then
5 A-06
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
L 2
23
24
25
loo
it's no longer in Twin Springs; it goes in Creekwood II. I
would assume that is --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's -- that's an
assumption.
MR. ODOM: Assumption.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I --
MR. ODOM: And he told us that he owns this property
directly next to it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm sorry, I wasn't paying
attention; I was reading this again. I don't see that the
notification requirements change if it's an alternate plat.
MR. ODOM: So it would still be Creekwood II, right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm saying you have to --
it's -- you have to give -- and I don't -- I understand that
they receLved sign-offs on a petition, but I don't see that
the law allows for that. It says here if all or part of the
subdivided tract has been sold to nondeveloper owners, the
Court shall give notice to each of those owners by certified
registered mail. It doesn't say they can sign another
statement; it says they have to get it by certified mail,
period. So, I think every member of both subdivisions needs
to get it by certified mail. That's what our rules say. I
mean, there's no gray area, to me.
JUDGE TINLEY: The sign-off that was done by the
Twin Springs Ranch owners was done in connection with the
_-N-O6
101
,...
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
restrictions and covenants that were previously imposed on the
property.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: The sign-off was done to allow the
amendment to exclude that. It wasn't done as a waiver of
notice, for example, of the requirements under the -- under
the plat rules, that they be given notice under these rules by
certified or registered mail.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine. I'm cool with
I that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think they both need to -- I
mean, I think both can be done as the alternate plat process,
which just speeds it up; it comes in one time. But everyone
has to get a certified letter saying that this is happening,
and it has to be put in the paper,
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine.
MR. ODOM: And -- and to go back to Mr. Williams, I
received this, again -- his brother did the same thinq -- on
Friday, and I really didn't have a lot of time when we met to
go over this on the weekend, looking at this and trying to
understand it a little bit more, that we were trying to get it
in here. It seemed to be -- it was a little bit vague where
25 was going. After I read it, then I felt like Creekwood II
needed to be notified.
JUDGE TINLEY: In the agenda item that you have,
5-8-Ob
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Mr. Odom, you're asking for a public hearing on deleting this
acreage from the Twin Springs Ranch. That's what you're
asking for the public hearing on?
MR. ODOM: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that only?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wouldn't we do Creekwood II?
MR. ODOM: Well, to me, it would -- I think both of
them need to be notified. I can't see moving 25-A into
someone's subdivision without them knowing about it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me see if I can move it
along those lines; that we approve the appropriate
notification -- notification to all property owners in Twin
Springs and Creekwood II, and publication of same, and set a
public hearing for the revision -- proposed revision of plat
for Lot 25 in Twin Springs 2, for June --
MR. ODOM: 12.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- 12, at 10:10 a.m. Does
that fit?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'L1 second it, if I can make
a --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- slight modification to it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you need to do the --
the first. public hearing on Twin Springs at 10 o'clock, and
s-fl o6
103
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
then a second one at 10:05 on Creekwood II.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that.
MS. HARDIN: You already have one set at 10:00. You
already have one set for 10:00.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
MS. HARDIN: Hidden Hills is set for 10:00.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Well, 10:05 and 10:10.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's fine. That's good.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: If we don't do the first
one, the second one's a moot point.
JUDGE TINLEY: My question is whether or not the
agenda item and the materials submitted for an alternate plat
process to include this within Creekwood is -- if we
sufficiently have that in front of us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the reason Creekwood II is
in parentheses in the agenda posting is because I asked it to
be, because I thought this is what needed to happen. I
visited with Truby on this, and we -- and I -- you know, I was
hoping that the County Attorney would say that since we had
Creekwood II listed under the agenda item, we could do it for
both public hearings if that's what we decided to do.
MR. EMERSON: For purposes of today, I think there's
probably adequate notice that you're talking about both
subdivisions. But --
5-P-06
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
109
JUDGE TINLEY: For the purpose of setting public
hearings on both of those, only as indicated in the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: For today only.
MR. EMERSON: Yeah. I think you need two separate
hearings.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, we're doing it in two
hearings.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion and second.
Any question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We know what precinct this
next one's in.
MR. ODOM: Precinct 3.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come to Item 18, if we
might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for
revision of plat for Falling Water, Lot 117-A and 116-D,
creating Lot 117-R, and located in Precinct 3.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're trying to set a record for
the most revisions of a plat ever.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, this by far has the
record.
5-8-06
105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: This is combining two lots into one, as
it's proposed, and I'd ask the Court to accept that revision
of plat for Falling Water.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we did the public hearing
last time?
MR. ODOM: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- to approve the revision of plat
for Falling Water, Lot 117-A and Lot 116-D, creating Lot
117-R. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to
Item 19; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
employees' health insurance coverage for 2007 with regards to
the process and timing. Commissioner Nicholson?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: What I'd like to see happen
here is that the risk management consultant, Gary Looney, work
with us in the month of July to -- to decide on employee
health coverage for 2007. I'd like to get that done before --
s a-o6
106
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
coincident with the budget process. There may be some changes
that we want to make in our coverage and premiums. I'm
looking at a letter from last year -- December 24, 2005 --
where we were still working the last week in December on
insurance. I don't want that to happen again. Even though if
it carries over one more week, I won't be here anyhow, so I
won't have to worry about it, but I think we ought to get it
done more timely this year. So, I'm proposing that we meet
with Mr. Looney in July and hear his proposals for -- for
employee health coverage. It's my understanding that the --
that the contract with the administrator goes for two more
years. It's a three-year contract, so we would just be
dealing with -- I think we'd just be dealing only with the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Coverage.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's good. You make a
motion to set it -- do it in July?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JODGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that we deal
with the health insurance consultant in July -- relative to
the coverage issues? Is that what you're talking about?
(Commissioner Nicholson nodded.)
s-e-oe
1
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-. 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
107
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we should have a
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussion?
of the time frame problems dealing with the health insurance
issue way late in the year, and the problem we had with
getting enrollments done timely, getting the benefit cards
activated in a timely manner, I wrote to Mr. Looney and asked
him to give us a timeline on how that process should proceed
so that we wouldn't have those difficulties. And I've given
each member of the Court a copy of the memorandum that he
returned to me to give us a timeline, and his closing question
was, "When do you need budget projections for 2007?" And
that's, obviously, the purpose of Commissioner Nicholson's
question, in order so we can incorporate that in the budget
process. And I will respond accordingly, depending upon how
the vote occurs. Any other questions or comments? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
MAYOR SMITH: Judge, I'd like to mention, the City
5-8-06
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
savings by combining our employees. It would have to be
mutually beneficial, and you couldn't do it before 2008, but
the City is still interested in doing that. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I -- I was
present in a Council meeting when that was suggested, to at
least look into the process of creating a large group to be
comprised of all public employees and possibly even school
district employees, or at least local public employees. In my
last discussion with Mr. Looney, he had received some inquiry
from -- from a representative of the City's plan, making
preliminary inquiry about that, so I think those discussions
are underway, at least on a preliminary basis.
MAYOR SMITH: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think just a comment on that.
I don't -- I think we need to make sure that we, at our
workshop, invite members of the City to come and -- you know,
the full Council, if they so choose, or representative of
the City or whoever, so they can listen to our conversation,
even if they're not going to necessarily participate in the
plan next year. That way, you get an idea what the County's
doing.
MAYOR SMITH: This is something that, if we work
together, should be mutually beneficial to both parties.
Thank you.
s-a-oE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
109
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 20, consider the
library agreement between Kerr County and City of Kerrville
and authorize the County Judge to give notice to the City of
Kerrville of the County's intent to terminate and renegotiate
County on the library. Part 11 says, in part, "This agreement
shall remain in full force and effect for a period of one year
beginning October 1, 2005. It shall continue automatically
for successive year, unless either party gives notice in
writing by July lst of the year that they want to terminate
the agreement at the end of then current year." So, what that
says is if either party desires to make changes in the
interlocal agreement, that notice has to be given by -- before
July 1. I'm proposing to give notice. And the reason I'm
proposing to give notice has got to do with Part 9. The first
sentence says, "The parties agree that the County's minimum
contribution for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 shall be $300,000."
And then it goes on to talk about both parties need to approve
their budgets and that sort of thing. First sentence of Part
9 will obviously be obsolete as of October 1, so at a minimum,
I think it would be good to -- to agree with the City of
Kerrville to strike that -- that language. I don't know of
5-8-06
110
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
any other revisions that might be desirable in the contract.
It could be that some will surface during the budgeting
process, but I don't have any idea what they'd be. But,
anyhow, the sole reason for serving notice that we intend to
alter the contract would be to change that first part, first
sentence in Part 9.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: To take out a specific
~ figure?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. Then, Commissioner,
if you took that sentence out, it would say, "In future
years" -- you can leave that -- "the parties agree that it is
the intent of both the City and the County to evenly
participate in the proposed net operational expenses as
recommended by the Library Board subject to approval by both
the City Council and Commissioners Court." So, the City's
control and the County's control over their spending will be
the process that requires approval by both entities of the
proposed budget.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As a matter of fact, that
number does not accurately reflect our participation this
~ year.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. So, I -- I move that
we authorize the County Judge to give notice to the City of
Kerrville that we intend to -- I have to say "terminate";
that's the language in the agreement -- the library interlocal
5-8-06
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
agreement and to propose changes to it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are we saying "terminate" or
"terminate/renegotiate"?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes, let's do that. And,
again, my only intent is to clean up the agreement.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll second. And I'll also just
add that I think the Judge can give a little bit more
explanation in the letter that it's not the intent to
terminate. The intent is to clean up some language in the
current agreement.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: That's good.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second. Do we
have any questions or discussion on the motion? I've been
presented with some public participation forms. The first one
is by Mr. Joe Benham. Mr. Benham?
MR. BENHAM: Judge, I'd be happy to defer to the
mayor if he wants to go first.
MAYOR SMITH: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Gene Smith, mayor of Kerrville, has
also filed a public participation form. Mr. Mayor?
MAYOR SMITH: Right. Thank you. I'm not speaking
as mayor; I'm more or less speaking as myself. The City Clerk
e-mails the Commissioners Court agenda to each Councilman, and
I received it Friday, and I looked at this agenda item and I
thought, well, we must have some major problems here. And I
s e-oh
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
112
thought since we have a Library Advisory Board, that if you
had problems, that should have been addressed by the Library
Advisory Board. But after listening to Commissioner
Nicholson's explanation, I understand fully and I have no
objections to this. And my -- I hate to be so negative to
think that there was some problem between the dear old city
and the dear old county, so I'm glad to find out that this was
relatively minor, and I appreciate you pointing out the
correction that's necessary.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Why would you ever think
that, Mr. Mayor?
MAYOR SMITH: Well, you know how it is. Thank you
very much. There's no problem here, as far as I'm concerned,
with the City. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Mr. Benham?
MR. BENHAM: Thank yau, Your Honor. Good morning,
gentlemen, For the record, I'm Joseph Benham; S live at 522
Rolling Gzeen, Kerrville, Kerr County. Proud resident and
taxpayer. I beg your indulgence in prefacing my remarks about
the library to remind you of and invite you to the Memorial
Day observance, which will take place right out here at the
war memorial on the Kerr County Courthouse grounds at 2 p,m.
on May the 29th. I know some of you, the Judge and
Commissioner Williams, have been pretty regular attendants.
It's a very moving ceremony with a lot of World War II
s-s-oh
113
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
veterans, and veterans of more recent vintage present.
Wreaths from a lot of civic patriotic organizations are laid
at the war memorial, and we have a ceremonial rifle volley and
Taps, and I would certainly hope that all of you -- I want you
to know that you're all invited, and I hope that all of you
will be able to attend.
I'd also like to thank the County Commissioners -- I
put on -- that was wearing my Veteran's Council hat. I'll put
on my Kerr County 150th birthday Steering Committee hat, and
thank you for the hard work that went into that 150th birthday
observance. This county can be extraordinarily proud of how
we showed what can be done in something like that. We had
more people at any one of our events, from what we can find
out, than other counties which were formed at the same time as
Kerr had for all of their festivities. So, you can
congratulate yourselves for the county's participation and
support. As president of the symphony -- that's another
hat -- it was my privilege to introduce Judge Tinley and
Mrs. Tinley at the last concert and, again, thank them in
person for their participation, and through them, all of you
in the county.
Now I'll put on the other hat, which is Friends of
the Library. I'm greatly relieved to hear what Commissioner
Nicholson had to say, and I won't take up a lot of your time,
except to say that when you do get into the process of
s-e-oe
114
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
amending the contract, renegotiating it, that it will -- that
will not lead to any reduction in your contributions. I
have never seen a renegotiation process in which the party
that wanted it renegotiated said, "Let's renegotiate this so
we can put more funding in this agreement." And I've served
on enough boards and committees -- school board, utility
district board and so forth; I know money's always short. But
please remember the importance of this library. Let me just
wrap it up with a couple of mottos, which those of us who grew
up in rural areas I think probably know and, I suspect, honor.
One of them is the saying that you put the hurt -- I'm sorry,
you put the medicine where the hurt is. Well, the hurt in
this sense is a distinct need to maintain and, indeed, improve
on the library, which is one of the most heavily used
facilities in the state of Texas. And I'll be happy to work
with you on any -- to deal with that in more detail, as I'm
sure Mr. Lipscomb from the Library Advisory Board will.
The other is by the immortal Bum Phillips, who said,
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Well, we have a
magnificent library here, folks, and we just want to see it
grow and prosper, and we'd hate to see it fixed in such a way
that it hurt the library. And I would simply ask you to
remember those things as you move into the budget process and
as you address this contract. And I'm grateful to you for
5-8-06
115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
your time. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Benham. We appreciate
you being here. Anyone else have a desire to be heard on this
issue? I have a motion and second before the court. Any
further discussion on the motion? All in favor of that
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to
Item 21, if we might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to approve grant agreements with Texas Department of
Agriculture for award under the "Texas Yes!" Program in
connection with event under sponsorship of the Kerrville
Convention and Visitors Bureau to benefit the Kerrville
Boardwalk Fund. The Court will recall that sometime back, the
Court approved our becoming a member -- I think it was making
application to the "Texas Yes!" program -- for an event to be
held out at a local bed and breakfast, actually under the
sponsorship of the Kerrville Convention and Visitors Bureau,
with the funding to be derived to benefit the Kerrville
Boardwalk Fund. The -- the request -- the membership and
application to the "Texas Yes!" would be to facilitate their
obtaining certain -- I believe it was advertising funds in
5-8-06
1
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
116
Last week I received a rather voluminous package that came in
with regard to certain agreements concerning grant funds to be
awarded, and I forwarded those to the County Attorney's
office, and he responded. And I'm not going to steal his
thunder; I'm going to let him come tell us what his thinking
was in regard to those grant agreements. And I've got them
here if he wants to refer to his information.
MR. EMERSON: I have it --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. EMERSON: -- designated in the letter. I
well as a copy of the transcript from the original January 9th
Commissioners Court meeting. And my primary concern is, I
don't think the agreements, as presented, mirror what the
Court had in mind when they approved it in January. If you
refer back to the January transcript, there's quite a bit of
discussion, but specifically, on Page 55, Line 6, Commissioner
Williams says, "If the grant is awarded and it's administered
by the Boardwalk people, are they obligated to use it solely
and exclusively to promote your event?" And the rest of the
conversation works around that. I'm not sure the
Commissioners Court understood that if this grant was
approved, that the grant would be awarded and the County would
-8-05
117
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
be responsible for managing the grant, the paperwork for the
grant, the expenditures from the grant, as well as having the
liability for any misapplication that might come up as a
result of it.
And the documents, as they're presented, state under
Paragraph 2.5 that Kerr County is the grantee, that the
grantee's agent is the gentleman that applied for it. The
grantee is required to perform all proposed project
activities; that's under Section 3.2. Section 4. 6, failure to
comply may result in grantee's future ineligibility; i.e.,
Kerr County's. Under 5.1, Kerr County must have
possession/access of all records for potential audit. Under
6.3, Kerr County has the liability for the misuse of the
funds. Under 8.1 to 8.4, that the property shall be used in
maintained, and grantee, Kerr County, shall develop a control
system to insure adequate safeguards to prevent loss, damage,
and theft. And then under 10.1, and I quote, "Grantee is not
relieved of its duties and obligations imposed by this
agreement through delegation by grantee to a third party."
So, as I'm reading it, Kerr County has all the liability, all
the responsibility, but no real control over the process,
unless Kerr County delegates an overseer to work specifically
with the applicant in this case.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My recollection is that a lot of
5-8-06
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
this was brought up, and I think one of my concerns I had at
the time was that it appeared that there was a lot of benefit
to a private entity.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And somehow we got over that
hurdle. But I don't -- I recall that the County was not going
to have all the responsibilities, and don't want them. I
mean, especially under this situation -- particular situation.
So, I mean, I think at this point, you know, you might refer
it back to the Convention and Visitors Bureau -- Convention
and Visitor Bureau; refer to it them saying that we're not
willing to participate in this manner, and let them decide
what they want to do.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yes. I wonder how it was
determined that we would be grantee instead of the Boardwalk
Association, Convention and Visitors Bureau or somebody else.
I think if -- if someone else was designated to be the
grantee, then we wouldn't have any problems with this,
wouldn't have any liability. I don't know how you change
that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We just went through that
last meeting with a similar application that was requested by
Texas State Arts and Crafts Educational Foundation for a grant
also for the "Texas Yes!" Agriculture Department. I guess the
only difference that I can see in my mind about that is that
5-g-n6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
119
they're doing the improvements on county property. We still
own that property, and those are -- those dollars are going to
go there. But, you know, we raised this issue before, and it
was kind of glossed over in terms of -- of who's going to
administer that. C.V.B., admittedly, is not set up to do
that, and doesn't particularly want to do that. And the
response came from this gentleman, Well, it's going to be done
by the Boardwalk Association. Which goes back to your
question, then. Wouldn't they be the grantee if that's the
case?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I think what I'm hearing is
we're saying we don't want to be the grantee, so we don't want
the grant if somebody else can't be the grantee.
JUDGE TINLEY: My recollection at the time was that
our -- our involvement was going to be merely applying for
membership --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- in this program, and then all the
rest of it would be handled away from us, without any further
action or responsibility on our part.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it -- unless I'm mistaken,
it can be handled that way, because that's the way the River
Star is handling it. The membership -- we're not
administering that grant, I don't believe.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's what Judge
5 8 0 6
120
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Tinley said, is what was represented to us is that all that
was required of us was just to apply and do whatever, be the
applicant.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, what do we need to do?
I agree with everything that's been said here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we refer it to
Convention and Visitors Bureau and see if they want to figure
out how to amend it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Convention and Visitors
Bureau or the Boardwalk?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Convention and Visitors
Bureau wasn't going to benefit by this.
JUDGE TINLEY: Or the -- or the project proponent,
maybe all three of them. Say, "You guys figure it out."
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would work.
DODGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We don't need to do any kind
of court order?
JUDGE TINLEY: I'll handle the notification to those
entities, and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we probably do need a
court order on this.
5-8-06
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
121
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would think so. 'Cause it
looks like that we've made a commitment prior to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll just make a motion that, at
this time, Commissioners Court does not want Kerr County to be
the grantee under this grant.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's the part of "no"
we understand.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does that include any notification to
these entities?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And please notify them and see
if they have some additional information they want to provide
the County.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do we have a second on that?
MS. THOMPSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Just to say I appreciate
the County Attorney's diligence in bringing this kind of thing
to our attention.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hear, hear.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
s-a-oa
122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to
Item 22, if we might, reports from the departments. I.T.?
MR. TROLINGER: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before you launch off into
your deal --
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We had -- in one of our
previous agenda items this morning, there was a lady here from
the Indigent Health Care program that is employed by us, as
well as Peterson Hospital. And one of her concerns -- or one
of her suggestions or recommendations to make her function
better was to -- it was suggested that there's a possibility
that we could link up via computer with other government
entities so that she can research and get information that
would help her make decisions in her business. Would you be
kind enough to touch base with her and sit down with her and
find out what her needs are, and see if there's possibly a way
that we could link up?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. We had a meeting with a
vendor -- I.H.C., I think it was -- to discuss exactly that,
and we had asked the vendor to come back to us with a solution
where they hosted the computers in their facility, instead of
the County and the hospital trying to host their own hardware.
s-e-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
123
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, she mentioned new
software, but we're thinking -- what we're thinking is, go
ahead and give her access to the Tax Assessor's -- some of
their information, and Appraisal District, and so that she can
-- you know, and she may have access to it already. I mean,
just -- I mean --
MR. TROLINGER: I understand. So, they're asking
for access to county public records.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
MR. TROLINGER: Oh, very good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And maybe access to the
Collections Department to, you know, somehow -- it seems we've
spent a lot of money on a lot of software already, and we
might be able to -- not buy more, but just give her access to
something that the County's already doing.
MR. ALFORD: We met with her this morning after
y'all's meeting, and opened up our doors and started a
procedure on how she can access -- we will access it for her,
but how she will have full access to what she needs through
our department.
JODGE TINLEY: Some of the search capability that
you have?
MR. ALFORD: Which will cover some of the stuff that
you were just talking to Mr. Trolinger about; tax records,
motor vehicles and that type of stuff, as to how many they
s-a oc
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
124
own, what they own, if there's any liens, bankruptcy, what
property's in their name. We already have access to that
through some other programs, so she will already have a head
in the door.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Trolinger, just pretend I
didn't say a word.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Some of it may be as simple
as she may not know how to access KCAD data. I can get on
there and answer questions, 'cause 2've done it recently, but
it takes a little know-how to do it.
MR, TROLINGER: And the County public access website
that has all the courts and tax office information is -- is
going to start probably at the end of this week, and by the
end of the month, I anticipate we'll have the first pieces of
county data online that are similar to Central Appraisal
District's website.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Obviously, what our
objective in all that would be is to help improve those
processes so that we can reduce our liability for indigent
health care.
MR, TROLINGER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NZCHOLSON: So, if there's any
information that will help her do that, we ought to do it.
Save a bunch of money.
MR. TROLINGER: My initial answer was speaking to
s-a-ob
.~ r . ~...~ _..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
125
Okay. Over trie past two montns, the tax, financial, ana
software upgrade has been underway. We're about 80 percent
complete. Two projects left, Jury and Hot Checks. And
although they're relatively small, they're important, but
those are not scheduled yet. Those are the only two pieces
left. Law enforcement's online today, and they just started
the project's going very well, in my view. Now --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was going to say --
MR. TROLINGER: -- there are issues, and there
always will be. But Software Group's bending over backwards
and going above and beyond the contract hours to make sure
that additional people that need it get the training, and that
additional customization is going to be provided. One -- one
item that's not on my written report is that the police chief
at Kerrville Police Department and the Sheriff have been
discussing the City's integration into Odyssey, and basically
integrating those two functions. The Software Group's
evaluating that. It's the same thing tnat Gillespie county
does; their municipal and county is using Odyssey. And it
looks like the Police Chief is getting serious about it,
considering it. And everything else is in my written report.
JODGE TINLEY: Are you satisfied with the level of
training, both that being given and the reception of that
s-a o~,
`. - ~ _ ~ -
126
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
training, and the progress of our employees under that
I training?
MR. TROLINGER: The -- with a few exceptions, and
the few exceptions are being addressed. But as far as
Software Group and their -- their ability to find the weak
areas and, just on their own initiative, spend extra time
on-site, I'm very satisfied. But we do have some people in a
couple of departments that need additional training once the
big project's rolled out.
JUDGE TINLEY: And have you received a commitment
from Software Group to provide that training?
MR. TROLINGER: We're going to provide it in-house,
I believe. It's for view-only users, typically.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When do you anticipate this
transition to Odyssey will be complete?
MR. TROLINGER: Friday.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Entirely?
MR. TROLINGER: We'll be at -- with the exception of
the public web site and, as I mentioned, Jury and Hot Checks,
the software will be installed and live. It's going very
well.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Any more questions for
Mr. Trolinger?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Appreciate your
s-a-oe

127
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TROLINGER: You're welcome.
JODGE TINLEY: Road and Bridge. Mr. Odom.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The road projects we have, in
April we completed sealcoat on Lower Reservation and
Weatherby. We had about 1.4 miles that we redid, around
the next budget year, to pick up from there and to go on over
the next couple of budgets and redo that area. Also, as you
see, office projects, the subdivisions and meeting on concept
plans, as you can see from the number of subdivisions being
brought to you, there's a lot of interest in development of
land in Kerr County. We understand that all the surveyors are
really busy, but we need your help in handling all of these
requests. The Subdivision Rules provide a certain number of
days for us to review the drawings and documents before they
are placed on the agenda. We've already discussed that, and
we have a direction, basically, the Court wants me to follow.
And I know that these surveyors are -- are booked. Everybody
is. But they wait till the last minute to bring it in. It
makes it quite difficult to get all the information, or to
look at something and present it to y'all, and so we ask you
to bear with us. We've been as accommodating as we can.
Depending upon the circumstances, we'll do that. But it's
very tough for the office to get all this together and get it
5-8 06
~ ~ L_. r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
128
to Kathy, and for her to get it on the agenda for a final.
As you see also, the floodplain, all of those
listed, there's quite a lot of time with meetings, telephone
calls, and inspections. However, there are many more that are
handled by the office staff. Most of those are inquiries by
realtors and citizens looking for property to purchase. These
usually require the time to look them up on the computer,
print a copy for the inquirer, and supply a name with whatever
information we have on the property. Many times a piece of
property is checked numerous times. We have them coming in --
if a realtor can't sell it to one, he's got another one, and
so they'll come in, and we -- we repeat the same scenario.
The employees. Since the last report, two employees have
left. I thought I replaced one; I'm not quite sure. We have
to wait and see how the physical turns out, but we're
interviewing for another position. One took a job, I think,
months. And our budget -- our current budget is right on
cut last year, which definitely we'll be talking about dump
s-a-n~
~. - -__~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
129
trucks and looking at how I might be able to handle
~ inspections and things like that with Doug and Joe, maybe one
I
more person put back into the budget. Z'm open for any
questions.
JUDGE TINLEY: Questions for Mr. Odom? Thank you,
I sir.
MR. ODOM: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here.
Facilities and Maintenance. Mr. Holekamp.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Before you go, I have a
question -- quick question. Sorry. On the list here, where
you go -- your code off to the side, when you say
"preliminary," does that mean preliminary`s been approved on
those, or preliminary is pending?
MS. HARDIN: Preliminary's pending.
MR. ODOM: Pending.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pending?
MR. ODOM: It will say "C" when it's completed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well --
MS. HARDIN: We actually have those preliminary
plats in our office. They haven't been --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You have -- the plats are there,
but we -- so the preliminary that's been approved is in the
"N.F." group?
MS. HARDIN: Yes.
-B-Oti
130
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 LETZ: Needs filing. And then "C"
would be the final had been approved?
', MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: "Sealcoat Baldwin Road."
Is that Buster's driveway? (Laughter.)
MR. ALFORD: His future driveway.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Okay, I gave y'all a report. I think
it was in your box. Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, Indoor
Arena, and Union Church's activity for March and April. And
also, I brought my calendar for the future. I have a -- we
have three available weekend dates between now and the first
of 2007 in the Exhibit Hall. We have -- we've had a big run
on rental. Fortunately -- or unfortunately, I guess, might be
-- depends on your perspective, is that there's really no
place in this community for rental -- reasonable rental for
wedding receptions, Quinceaneras and that sort of thing, and
we've gotten a big, big run on those, and begging for a whole
lot more slots if they can get them.
We -- as y'all were -- I think everybody was pretty
much aware that about a month and a half ago, we lost our --
our trustee program, because the supervisor of the trustees,
B.J., had rotor cuff surgery. So, he's back, but he's on --
we call it light duty, and light duty at the Sheriff's is --
s-a-o6
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
is that he stays over there. So, we really don't have him
mowing in parks. We're going try to keep up with parks as
much as we can without -- until he's back on track again, but
if you get some reports that the grass is getting a little
tall, be patient. We'll -- we're trying to get to all of
them, and then do the courthouse and everything also. Another
employee went down on me over the weekend. Accident. Alice
fell off her bicycle and broke an arm, I think, or a wrist or
something. And it's her right arm, so you can imagine, when
she comes back, she's going to be kind of handicapped to doing
a lot of the things that she was doing. So, we have got
several projects in the mill that are working right now.
We've got -- I got somebody that is agreeing to put
electricians coming to give us a price on dropping the lights.
But the ceiling has already been contracted to be done. It
just -- timing is real important, because we got an election,
I think, Saturday, and some of these things we just don't
start unless we know we have a window of opportunity to
complete them. We're -- that's a project that I want to
complete by the end of this fiscal year for sure, because it's
been long overdue. We've been spending a lot of time at the
J.D.C. center with Kevin. Things are going very well, as far
as I can tell. It's been taking a lot of time. We -- he just
informed me a while ago they did those floors this weekend,
5-8-06
132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and -- and they really look good.
So, there's several issues that we're working out,
and at the rate it's been going the last two weeks, I'm hoping
we can make some adjustments on this budget thing this coming
year to not make it so high, hopefully. That particular
buildinq is -- has got some little dings. It's got some
little problems, but I think, between Mr. Stanton and our
department and -- and some vendors that are willing to show up
and work, I think we're going to get a lot of those things
resolved, and they shouldn't be reoccurring so often. That's
my hope. Because we really need a little turn of luck out
there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In more ways than one.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, sir, I understand that. But
part of that I don't control. Any questions?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Mr. Holekamp, sometime last
year, we -- we revised the processes and procedure for booking
and utilization of the Youth --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh-huh.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: -- Exhibit Center, and made
that a little more formal and a little more systematic. How's
that working?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Very well. Some people lack patience
with it. I don't know. It's working really well. We're
still fine-tuning some of the -- let me call -- let me call it
5 ft-06
133
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
kind of the background information. We -- we had not, prior
to now, got enough information when you book it. The booking
part is working fine. I mean, that -- that's working good.
People like -- they say they just can't believe that we're
I booked up that much. But, no, it's working pretty well. I --
i like I said, there's some questionnaires that need to go to
these people that rent it with more specific answers, so --
but that's an in-house issue that I'm trying to resolve.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: One of the major issues
that we were dealing with that was whether or not the facility
was available for booking reservation on an equal access --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Has that been taken care
of?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I've got the same chance of
renting it same time next year as anybody else?
~ MR. HOLEKAMP: If it's available on those dates. If
they're protected dates, based on our rules, you may not be
able to get the weekend you want, but most of those issues are
going to be with the -- the indoor arena, because the Exhibit
Center, like I said, it's covered up till the first of the
year, pretty much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are we covering our costs on the
exhibit hall?
s-a-o6
134
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
~0
21
22
23
24
25
MR. HOLEKAMP: Excuse me. I'd have to run some
numbers. I can't give you that answer just off the top of my
head. Now, I can -- I can probably get with Mindy or Tommy,
and start -- and I could put a pencil, because we're getting
some history in the last two or three months of -- of what
we're getting and what it's costing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like to see those numbers,
'cause I don't want to be subsidizing the public in that area.
MR. HOLEKAMP: I understand that. I don't either.
JUDGE TINLEY: Glenn, how is the new heat and air
conditioning equipment working?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Fine. The only problem we have is
some -- some people believe that it needs to be 65,
68 degrees, and I'm hard-headed, and I think 70 is cool
enough. It'll hold 70 fine for an event, but people think
that they're not supposed to sweat when they dance, so they
want it cooler. And I -- I kind of butt heads, because those
units -- I don't care where they are; you start dropping them
that low, you will freeze them up. So, I'm kind of
hard-headed about locking those things at 70 for these events.
JUDGE TINLEY: Have you been able to communicate to
the users about these areas where there's --
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- heat loss and that sort of thing?
MR. HOLEKAMP: We try our best. We try our best.
5-8-Oo
135
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
MR. HOLEKAMP: Commissioner, I'll get you some
comparisons for the Court as to costs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not a rush. I just think we
need to make sure our expenses are covered when we're using
the facilities we have.
MR. HOLEKAMP: Yes, okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Glenn, we might even want
to rethink our policy of letting that for free to
not-for-profits. May not change it, but we might want to
rethink it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Alford?
MR. ALFORD: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm the rascal that sicced the
indigent health care people on you.
MR. ALFORD: So you're the one.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you got a complaint about that,
bring it to me.
MR. ALFORD: I know Ms. Taylor from a different
world, so no, there's no problem. She didn't have time to sit
down this morning, but we pretty much told her what we thought
we could get for her. What we access is public records, so
there's not a confidentiality with or without the county
employee issue, so I think we'll be able to do something for
S-B-Oo
136
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
her. I really think we'll be able to find a lot of these
people she's looking for, anyway. I don't know how far we can
carry it as far as tax liens and motor vehicles and that, and
that it might -- I don't know how accurate our information is,
but I think it will give her a starting point, so I think it
would be beneficial. And --
JUDGE TINLEY: I think there may be a lot of people
in your system that are going to be people that she has apply
for eligibility in her system.
MR. ALFORD: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: And you may have some numbers that
are different from what she's getting, too, and that might be
some very telling information in itself.
MR. ALFORD: I believe you're correct. A very large
number of hers will be a very large number of ours. So, I
foresee us working very close, hand-in-hand, 'cause I know how
much a priority it is for the Commissioners Court. So,
there's no holds barred from us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As I understand our -- based on
today's actions, if she determines that she was given false
information, they're ineligible for a year.
MR. ALFORD: Yeah, that's what I think. Didn't
y'all -- y'all passed that not too long ago?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This morning.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We approved that this morning.
5-8-06

1
°-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-.- 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
'~ 2 4
25
137
MR. ALFORD: Good. I think the same thing. I gave
y'all a report that also should be in your boxes. Just quick
figures; I know y'all are getting ready to get out of here.
This year, we're up to $253,000 collected for County Court at
Law. We were at $229,000 last year, so we're up 4 or 5
percentage points. The best we can tell, and I kind of take
I
it with a grain of salt, that so far for 2005, last budget
year, we're up to 793,000. And the reason I say the best we
can calculate is some of the changes, and personnel in other
departments are not real familiar with their computer
softwares yet, so whenever I ask for some of these reports, I
kind of get the deer-in-the-headlights look. And we think
this is a close number. If nothing else, I think we'd
probably have a higher collection rate. Probably not by much.
Maybe, you know, couple thousand dollars, but I think that's
pretty accurate for last year's budget so far.
On the Odyssey program, it is -- it's going to work
real good for the clerks and for them. We're still playing
with it. Fortunately, we're probably more of the experienced
computer operators in the county, so I think in the future
it's going to be even better for us. We do have one issue to
report. I'm not real sure, from this point forward, how my
reports to y'all will look each month. Different fields,
different buttons, different whistles, but we'll get you
something that tries to accurately depict what our collection
s-a-ne

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
138
rate is and what's assessed and how much y'all are bringing
in. I've been working with Mr. Trolinger on different things,
different issues around the courthouse, trying to keep him
freed up and essentially doing okay. I have some comments
that I'm not going to repeat, but just to back up
Mr. Trolinger, there is a lot of the stuff that the Odyssey
program will do, you know, that the employees will learn in
the future that will really help the County out. And just --
it's just a matter of getting them to think outside the box.
We talked about one this morning at 7:15. That was like, "Oh,
yeah, they can be doing this instead." So, I think in the
future, with the growing pains, it will be a whole lot better.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any questions for Mr. Alford? Thank
you, sir.
MR. ALFORD: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here. Okay.
Any member of the Court have anything to consider in closed or
executive session? If not, we'll move on to the fourth
section of our agenda. Let's talk about the bills, the
finances.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to pay the
bills. Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just a quick question. It's
5 8-06
139
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
probably to our airport guys here. On Page 30 is our -- one
of our payments of 21,000. How many of those -- I mean, do we
pay this in quarter -- quarterly payments or one time a year?
MR. TOMLINSON: They're monthly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I believe it's monthly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We pay it monthly, and a
large piece of that goes for grant match of what we're
funding.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN; $21,000 a month.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: 253,000 that we were obligated for
this budget year, if my recollection is correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? I'm
]ooking at Page 44, portable toilets at Flat Rock Lake. Was
that for the function out there -- the Easter function? I
guess my question really is, if there's a function taking
place out there, would not those toilets be the obligation of
the -- of whoever's holding --
COMMISSI0NER WILLIAMS: Sponsors.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sponsor, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Absolutely, it would be.
Absolutely.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know what the date is there.
MR. TOMLINSON: We have -- we have had portable
-a-~s
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
140
toilets out there during certain	months of the	year that we
paid	before.			
	COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS:	We do?	
	MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.		
	COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS:	That's interesting.
	COMMISSIONER	LETZ: What page?	
	COMMISSIONER	NICHOLSON:	Ingram Park	also.
	JUDGE TINLEY:	44.		
	COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS:	Maybe that's	routine, then.
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	Well, let's look that one up,
just	for fun.			
	JUDGE TINLEY:	Okay.		
i	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	We have a new	program, and we
have	never looked one u	p.		
	JUDGE TINLEY:	All righ	t.	
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	And what do I	look for
nowadays?
MR. TOMLINSON: I'm looking it up.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is it under vendor number?
MR. TOMLINSON: I'll look it up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, come on, Goddamn, he
comes right back and just takes over.
JUDGE TINLEY: Look under 505.
MR, TOMLINSON: Look under 2006, 05012058.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Here, you do it.
s-e-os
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2L
23
24
25
141
MR, TOMLINSON: That's what I said.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't want to have to do
everything.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's why I said I'll do it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you think I'm going to do
your work for you, you're crazy. I want you to show me the
number.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay, I will.	
JUDGE TINLEY: 2058.	
(Discussion off the record.)	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where's this number	you keep
talking about?	
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Underneath.	
JUDGE TINLEY: Item number.	
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The "I" item.	
MR, TOMLINSON: The item number.	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, good lord.	
MR. TOMLINSON: You can actually look at t	he last
four numbers and find it.	
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.	
it COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 2058?	
~ MR. TOMLINSON: It just says two portable	toilets at
Ingram Dam.	
it COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, Ingram Dam.	
~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here it says Flat	Rock Lake.
s-F-oS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1L
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
142
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Well, they miscoded it, then,
but that's what this is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your party, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, that's something we do
every year?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I'll talk to the U.G.R.A.
about paying for that, too. It's their --
JUDGE TINLEY: Won't pollute the river.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: It's their river we're
keeping clean.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, this will be changed to
Ingram Dam?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. They put the wrong
description in there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 1.
COMMISSIONER LET2: Kathy, are you all right? Need
a break? There's 12 of them.
MR. TOMLINSON: The first one is for Elections, for
5-8 06
143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
some ballots. The Clerk has asked for a transfer of $760.31
from Ballot Expense to Election Supplies.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion? All in favor, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 2.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 2 is for Indigent Health
Care. We need a hand check for this to VeriClaims, Inc., for
353.65. We're requesting a transfer from Eligible Expenses to
the Third-Party Administrator line item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, Tommy wouldn't --
wasn't there a VeriClaims in the regular set of bills too?
MR. TOMLINSON: There probably was.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was the amount?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, actually -- wait a, minute
there's two. I didn't catch that. There's one for 353.65 and
another one for 689.38.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Making a total of 1,043?
MR. TOMLINSON: Mm-hmm.
S-H-Gti
144
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got you. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And this one in the bills is
j $2,500.
MR. TOMLINSON: That was probably for the previous
I month.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So, we're dealing with
I time here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved,
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second,
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 2 and issuance of hand
I
check to VeriClaims for $1,043.03. Any question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising ~
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: Let me mention something, Judge.
This is -- this is the firm that we have a contract with that
I referenced previously during the day. That expires in -- in
September.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: VeriClaims?
s-a-oe
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
145
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. That's the firm I'm referring
to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a notice period that we
have to give them?
MR. TOMLINSON: I believe there is. Isn't there,
Rex?
MR. EMERSON: I couldn't tell you off the top of my
head.
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't remember either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need to make sure that that
doesn't slip out and we don't somehow automatically renew
that.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, no. Actually, I talked to
this person -- the person Friday -- Friday, and they are
sending us a new contract, so she recognizes that the contract
expires in September.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: And so I told her to go ahead and
send it to us so we would have it in-hand to know that we --
that we want to dispose of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: We ought to be looking at
all of our contracts, interlocal agreements to see if there's
any we need to open.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
5-8 06
146
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 3 is -- we're requesting a
transfer of $87 from Operating Expenses to Vehicle Insurance
for the Sheriff's Department, and it's for coverage -- it's to
the Texas Association of Counties for $87, and it's additional
charge -- coverage on two additional vehicles.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 4 is actually for two
budgets, for the jail and Commissioners Court. We have -- we
have an invoice from Columbia Casualty, and it's -- it's for a
claim involving the jail, and it's our -- it's the deductible
on our coverage. So, we're -- and, actually, it's legal
expenses, and we're asking for a transfer of $2,035 from the
Nurses line item in the jail budget to -- to Professional
Services in the Commissioners Court budget to make this
$10,000 payment.
5 8-06
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
147
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 4. Any question or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question. Recently,
I think I -- you and I were visiting, Judge, about this
Professional Services line, and I think you had told me that
our insurance guru comes out of this, and that he had not
bil]ed us for last year's work yet.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think he's since submitted some
billings, and there was a question about -- he had not billed
for a number of months, and I think we got that straightened
out. I think we've --
MR. TOMLINSON: I can't answer that. I don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: But, yeah, we had the discussion that
his -- he falls under Professional Services, or at least that
was my belief.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. He would, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. A]1 right, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: But I think we got that straightened
out.
MR, TOMLINSON:	Well,	apparently	-- I think there
was 15,000 originally in	there.	I believe	that's right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN:	Thirteen.	
s-a of
148
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
MR. TOMLINSON: There's 13,000. So, we have made
some payments out of it, out of that line item, previous to
this request.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was just on something
that --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if he's billing monthly, we may
run short on him. If we wipe this thing out to take care of
that deductible.
MR. TOMLINSON: We will.
JUDGE TINLEY: And we're going to have to. Because
my recollection was, I think it was $12,000 or something for
total annual cost for his services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, but the deductible we're
transferring in there from the jail budget, so it'd be a zero
net effect on our Professional Service line item.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, we're going to wipe it out.
We're adding enough to it to make $10,000 for the deductible.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the reason we're
moving money into it. Goes to zero.
MR. TOMLINSON: It will be zero.
JUDGE TINLEY: So I guess the bottom line, if he's
not been fully paid yet, well, when we get the next billing,
we're going to have to come back and figure out where it's
going to come from.
5-B-06
149
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Did I call for a vote on that?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have a motion and second?
MS. THOMPSON: And a vote.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We handled Item 4?
MS. THOMPSON: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's move on to Budget
Amendment Request Number 5.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 5 is to recognize a claim on
our insurance from Texas Association of Counties to -- for
$1,965.55 -- I mean, $1,464.55 to the revenue, and increasing ~
the Vehicle Repairs and Maintenance line item at the Sheriff's
Office for that amount.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 5. Any question or
discussion? All in favor, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 6.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 6 actually takes care of two
S-B-OE
150
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
departments. The first part is to the County Court at Law.
We're transferring $152.31 from the Special County Court at
Law Judge's line item, to Special Court Reporter. And for the
216th District Court, we're transferring $1,281.39 from
Special District Judge's line item to Special Court Reporter.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 6. Any question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment
Request 7.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay, 7 is for the Detention
Facility, transferring $683.19 from Detention Officers
Salaries in the -- in the Facilities budget to Maintenance --
$633.53 to Maintenance and Custodial Supplies, and $99.66 to
Repairs.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Number 7. Any question or discussion?
5-8-Oti
151
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Well, I wonder if this may
be kind of a red flag. We've cut our staff out there about
half or something like that, and so there's going to be a
large amount of unexpended salary for that facility. And I
think we need to be real careful we don't use that as free
money; that we actually realize that the same --
MR. TOMLINSON: I think the only time we've ever --
we've transferred anything out is for this purpose, for
maintenance.
JUDGE TINLEY: For the facility --
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- itself, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we're also running low in an
awful lot of items this early in the year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good point.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or comments? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 8.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 8 is for the 216th District
Court. We have Court-Appointed Attorney line item
expenditures of $8,961.10. We're trying -- asking for a
-6-06
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
transfer from Special Trials of $8,946.60 into Court-Appointed
Attorneys line item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this for one case? Or --
MR. TOMLINSON: No, it's -- looks like for six or
eight cases.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll pay anybody.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 8. Any questions or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't think it makes any
difference if we got a typo there in the department name,
215th versus 216th.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I don't want to transfer it
to another court.
MR. TOMLINSON: I did what I was talking about.
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
5-8-OE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
153
Amendment Request Number 9.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Nine is also for the
Detention Facility. I have a request from the director to
transfer $2,636.17 from Detention Officers Salaries to
Resident Medical Expenses.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. Would this be for
medical expenses that might be reimbursable from other
counties, or at least are these for Kerr County youth?
MR. STANTON: It would be expenses that are all
reimbursable from other counties.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
MR. STANTON: And some of them would fall under Kerr
County kids also, but we're reimbursed for those medical
expenses also through the Probation Department.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 9. Any question or
comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
i Amendment Request Number 10.
-a oe
154
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
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 10 is for the Auditor's
office. We're asking for a transfer of $6,731 from Group
Insurance, and $9,571.87 from Contract Fees, 2,462.08 from
Software Maintenance, with $1,885.52 into the Official Salary
line item and $15,113.76 into Assistants Salaries, and $562.94
into FICA Expense, and $1,110.23 to Retirement, and $92.50 to
the Bonds line item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How'd this happen?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, when Mindy decided that she
didn't want to take this as a full-time job, and the budget
was forthcoming, and she didn't want to have to deal with --
with budget issues, so I agreed to take it back, and so the
Judges appointed me effective May the 1st. And so this is to
put her salary back into where she was to start with.
JUDGE TINLEY: Basically, it's a reversal of a bunch
of the changes we made previously, when she was made Interim
Auditor?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's right. That's correct, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Welcome back.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you going to be around for a
while, we hope?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not leaving again? Played
enough golf?
5-8-06
155
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. TOMLINSON: I felt sorry for her. I told her
that I wouldn't expect her to go through the budget process if
she didn't want to do this. So -- so it was an act of mercy.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You get a gold star. I move
approval.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: I just might say, the time
she served, she was very helpful. She was always willing to
answer our questions and find answers, so from that point of
view, she did a good job.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's always been her track.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, that's the best
auditing job I've seen around here in I don't know when. Huge
improvement over that last character. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion and second to approve Budget
Amendment Request Number 10. Any question or comment? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 11.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 11, I'm going to change. For
this -- this AACOG Environmental Health Proceeds line item,
I'm going to change that to Nondepartmental. It would be Line
s-a oe
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
Item 10-409-207. That's -- I believe that's the Unemployment
line item that we pay quarterly. But what we -- the situation
we have here is -- is a grant that's -- from AACOG that's been
approved and accepted for Environmental Health to purchase
some equipment. We actually have to purchase the equipment
before we are reimbursed, so if -- if we can get -- we ought
to transfer the funds into his Capital Outlay line item to
allow him to make that purchase. So, we'll have the invoice
and the check to be able to submit to AACOG to get our
reimbursement.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do they reimburse 100
percent?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes. And once this is done, we'll
reverse what we've done.
I COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Cool.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 11. Any question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment
5 8-06
157
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Request 12.
MR. TOMLINSON: Twelve is a request from J.P.
Precinct 2, Dawn Wright, to cover salary expenses for a new
clerk. She's requested the transfer of $209.96 from Secretary
Salary, $561 from Group Insurance, and $100 from
Miscellaneous, totaling $870.96 to Part-Time Salaries.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is for training a new
clerk to replace the existing clerk?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes, her clerk resigned.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Second.
DODGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of Budget Amendment Request Number 12. Any question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Do we have
any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly
reports from the Sheriff's Department and Environmental Health
Department. Do I hear a motion that these reports be approved
as submitted?
5-8-Oti
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
158
(No response.)
DODGE TINLEY: Guess I don't,
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll move that, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded that the
named reports be approved as presented. Any question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Any member of
the Court have any reports in connection with their liaison or
committee assignments or otherwise?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just a couple things. I
told the Court I was going to go to a regional meeting for the
purpose of learning about where to find funds for public
events facilities. I did do that. That meeting was in
Fredericksburg, and it was -- essentially, I guess it was
called by R.C.& D., and it involved several different
agencies. But the bottom line is, when you really get down to
it, for trying to find large blocks of funding for public
events -- multi-purpose public events facilities, it's going
to boil down to the U.S.D.A. And the second part of that
s-e-oE
159
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
bottom line is that if you're going to do that, you got to
have a plan. You got to know what you want and what you got
to propose and what the cost is going to be, and we're not
there yet. And the only other thing I've got is just to tell
the Court that I learned that the Alamo Worksource folk,
having experienced a major whack at their budget -- whack in
their budget of almost $3 million, I believe, are going to be
looking around in the rural counties for -- in those counties
in which they have one-stop Worksource centers, they're going
to be looking around for cheaper space, So, I just want the
Court to keep that in mind. If they're looking for
rehabilitating space that may be available, that these folks
might be interested. And then I'll remind you that on
May 19th, I believe it is, Judge, the ribbon-cutting ceremony
at the Sheriff's Department for the first Distance Learning
Center created for law enforcement purposes by AACOG for their
Law Enforcement Academy. That'll be out here at the Sheriff's
Office where the equipment's in place, and I guess we'll greet
each other in two locations, by distance learning cameras and
so forth. That's all I have.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Couple of brief comments about
the Airport Board. I think the -- I'm very happy that the
Airport Board as whole seems to be willing and somewhat eager
to tackle the whole issue of operations at the airport. And
s-s-oE
160
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it was brought up at our last meeting, and direction given to
look at the possibility of the Airport Manager and a small
staff reporting straight to the Airport Board, and not through
the City of Kerrville system, and also the possibility of
contracting the entire operations to a third party. They
asked if the County would be interested in taking over that
operations, and we said no.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But there are those private
resources who do that, though.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But there are private entities
that do it. And I'm not sure that -- our airport's probably a
little bit small for that, but maybe not. But, anyway, we're
looking at other options, and I think the full board is --
from some recent discussions we've had, is aware that there
may be better financial alternatives than our current
arrangement with the City of Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there other things they do
outside of mowing? What else do they do?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They just -- there's a fair
amount of time that does go into keeping the lighting and such
like that operational and correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, then you're getting down
to some kind of specialized training, huh?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You have to be trained to do it.
I wouldn't say it's specialized. I mean, I think it's
s-e-o6
161
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
something that -- I mean, there's a lot of people that can --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can the same guy ride the
tractor and mow?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And adjust the light?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I don't know --
following up on what Commissioner Letz is saying, in addition
to the private sector proposals to run that, in addition to
the City and/or the County, if the Airport Manager worked
directly for the Airport Board, which is something we're
discussing, every single thing could be put out for bid. It
could be put out as a package, or could be put out as
individual items, and find the best possible price.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the way it should be,
in my opinion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we're -- but the Airport
Board is in agreement to do this -- this looking into this,
both the members from the City Council and members at large.
So, I think it's a -- everyone, for the first time, is really
looking at it seriously.
DODGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bonnie's asleep, so I'll go
ahead and make this statement. But the -- the only problem
you're going to have with that is the turf deal over at the
5-A-G6
162
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
City. The City Manager's going to be in -- have to be in
charge and want the report directly to him. That's -- I can't
I
imagine anything -- any other thing that would hold that up,
of him reporting directly to the board.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we've been able to point
out some items that they had in the proposed budget where the
private sector would do it cheaper -- private sector or the
County would do it cheaper than the City's amount. And
because of that, I think that they -- they don't have an
option but looking at it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I hear you.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Judge, I notice that our
brothers in Bee County Commissioners Court passed an order
supporting a boycott of their local Exxon stations. And then
I found out that the first day of the boycott, those local
stations' sales increased by 25 percent. And now I've got two
of my constituents that own gasoline stations wanting us to
boycott them so they can get a sales increase. That may be a
matter for -- for a future Commissioners Court meeting.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds like a marketing tool to me.
Anything else, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Sounds like our brothers in
Bee County ought to take on, you know global peace or border
s-a-oe
163
1 security or something a little easier next time.
2 COMMISSIONER WZLLIAMS: Arab petroleum.
3 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? We'll stand
4 adjourned.
5 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:46 p.m.)
8 STATE OF TEXAS I
9 COUNTY OF KERR I
10 The above and foregoing is a true and complete
11 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my
12 capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court
13 of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place
14 heretofore set forth.
15 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 12th day of
16 May, 2006.
17
18 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY: _ _
19 Kathy nik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
20
21
22
23
24
~~
L J
-8-G6
ORDER NO. 29660
REVIEW STATUS OF INDIGENT HEALTH CARE POLICY
PROVISIONS
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Adopt the four outlined suggestions as follows:
I. If an applicant to the IHCP does not appear for apre-scheduled
appointment, or call ahead of the appointment time to re-schedule, that
applicant may not re-apply to the IHCP for a period of six (6) months from
..., date of the missed appointment.
2. If an IHCP client does not respond to the written request for
review, or fails to provide requested information to complete review within
the designated time frame, he/she may not reapply for a period of six (6)
months from the date set for review.
3. If an applicant or client gives false information to IHCP, he/she
may not re-apply for a period of one (1) year from time the false information
was identified.
4. If an IHCP client fails to report a change within 14 days of the
change, and that change affects their eligibility, he/she may not reapply for a
period of one (1) year from date the change was identified by IHCP.
ORDER NO. 29661
APPROVE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE CENTER POINT
VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT GRANT APPLICATION TO FEMA,
DEPT. OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Support the Resolution for the Center Point Volunteer Fire Department grant
application to FEMA, Dept. of Homeland Security.
ORDER NO.29662
APPROVE APPLICATION FOR COMPTROLLER'S TOBACCO
COMPLIANCE GRANT
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioners Williams/Letz. The
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the application for Comptroller's Tobacco Compliance Grant.
ORDER NO.29663
REAPPOINT COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS TO AIRPORT BOARD
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Reappoint Commissioner Williams to the Airport Board for atwo-year term
effective June 1, 2006.
ORDER NO. 29664
OPEN BIDS FOR TOWN CREEK CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Move to accept bids for Town Creek Crossing Improvements, Pct. 1 & 3 and
refer to Road & Bridge for Recommendation:
1. Allen Keller Company -with various components listed, for a
total project bid price of $81,142.
2. MPB, Inc. -with various components listed, for a total bid price
of $109,139.96.
ORDER NO. 29665
CONTRACT WITH CONSULTING ENGINEER FOR REVIEW OF
ENGINEER DOCUMENTS IN KERR COUNTY SUBDIVISION RULES
AND REGULATIONS
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Authorize Commissioner Letz to meet with Mr. Wells and Len Odom to
work out the details of how this would work, get with the County Attorney
on an Agreement, and then authorize up to five (5) hour at $35 per hour to
,,,_ do a review of our current rules.
ORDER NO. 29666
REVIEW CONCEPT PLAN OF FALLS RANCH, PCT 3
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-1 to:
Accept the Concept Plan as presented.
ORDER NO. 29667
DISCUSS ROAD & BRIDGE TO PURCHASE A DITCH BUCKET
ATTACHMENT
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Road & Bridge Department purchasing a Ditch Bucket
attachment.
ORDER NO.29668
ABANDON, VACATE AND DISCONTINUE APPROXIMATELY 95
FEET OF DRUMMOND DRIVE
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Abandon, vacate, and discontinue approximately 95 feet of Drummond
Drive as recorded in the Kerr County Subdivision Records, Vol 4, Page 111,
Plat Records, located in Pct. 1, as described in the backup materials
presented.
ORDER NO. 29669
DISCUSS BID AWARD TO MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS FOR
COLD MIX AND BLACK BASE
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Based on Martin Marietta changing their price after we awarded the bids, we
cancel the award to Martin Marietta and award the bid for cold mix and
black base to the next low bidder which, is Vulcan Materials.
ORDER NO. 29670
REVIEW REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOTS 19 & 20 OF HIDDEN HILLS,
VOL 6, PAGE 362, AND SET A PUBLIC HEARING
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
To set a Public Hearing for the revision of Plat for Lots 19 & 20 of Hidden
Hills, Vol 6, Page 362, located in Pct. 2, for June 12, 2006 at 10:00 a.m.
.-- ORDER NO. 29671
REVIEW REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOT 25 OF TWIN SPRINGS
RANCH II, VOL 7, PAGE 167 (CREEKWOOD II-A, VOL 6, PAGE 106)
AND SET PUBLIC HEARING
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the appropriate notification to all property owners in Twin Springs
and Creekwood II, and publication of same, and set two Public Hearings; the
first Public Hearing for the revision of Plat for Lot 25 in Twin Springs 2 for
June 12, 2006 at 10:05 a.m. and the second Public Hearing for Creekwood II
for June 12, 2006 at 10:10 a.m.
ORDER NO. 29672
REVISION OF PLAT FOR FALLING WATER LOT 117 A & 116 D
CREATING LOT 117 R, PCT 3
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the revision of Plat for Falling Water, Lot 117A & 116D, creating
Lot 117R, located in Precinct 3.
ORDER NO.29673
DISCUSS EMPLOYEE'S HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR 2007
REGARDING PROCESS AND TIMING
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Meet with Mr. Looney, the Health Insurance Consultant, in July and hear his
proposals for employee's health insurance coverage for 2007 regarding
processing and timing.
... ORDER NO. 29674
CONSIDER LIBRARY AGREEMENT BETWEEN KERB COUNTY AND
KERRVILLE AND AUTHORIZE COUNTY JUDGE TO GIVE NOTICE
TO CITY OF KERRVILLE REGARDING TERMINATION AND RE-
NEGOTIATION
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Authorize County Judge to give notice to the City of Kerrville that Kerr
County intends to "terminate/renegotiate" the Library Interlocal Agreement
r., and propose changes to it.
._ ORDER NO. 29675
APPROVE GRANT AGREEMENTS WITH TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE FOR AWARD UNDER "TEXAS YES" PROGRAM IN
CONNECTION WITH KERRVILLE CONVENTION AND VISITORS
BUREAU TO BENEFIT KERRVILLE BOARDWALK FUND
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
State that at this time, the Commissioner's Court does not want Kerr County
to be the Grantee under this Grant, and include notifying the entities to see if
there is additional information that they want to provide the County.
ORDER NO. 29676
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 8th day of April, 2006, came to be considered by
the Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and
Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	136,486.46
14-Fire Protection	$	14,928.68
15-Road & Bridge	$	32,388.54
19-Public Library	$	25,000.00
31-Parks	$	183.00
50-Indigent Health Care	$	27,403.60
71-Schreiner Road Trust	$	1,024.00
76-Juvenile Detention Facility	$	4,303.25
TOTAL
$ 241,717.53
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner
Nicholson, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the
claims and accounts.
ORDER NO.29677
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY CLERK
ELECTIONS
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-402-330 Election Supplies
10-402-210 Ballot Expense
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $760 31
- ($760.31)
ORDER NO. 29678
BUDGET AMENDMENT
LATE BILL
INDIGENT HEALTH CARE
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes and issue a hand check in the amount of $1,043.03 to Vericlaims, Inc.
for May 3, 2006 and May 5, 2006 Fee on Paid Claims.
Amendment
Expense Code Description Increase/QDecrease
50-641-486 Third Party Administrators + $1,043.03
50-641-200 Eligible Expenses - ($1,043.03)
ORDER NO.29679
BUDGET AMENDMENT
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioners Baldwin, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-560-480 Vehicle Insurance
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease
+ $87.00
10-560-330 Operating Expense - ($87.00)
ORDER NO.29680
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COMMISSIONERS' COURT
COUNTY JAIL
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioners Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-401-486 Professional Services
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $2,035.00
10-512-106 Nurses - ($2,035.00)
ORDER NO.29681
BUDGET AMENDMENT
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioners Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-370-300 Various Refunds
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease

10-560-454 Vehicle Repairs/Maint. + $1,464 55'
*-To recognize funds received from Texas Association of Counties for
accident claims: 10'05 and 4'06.
ORDER NO. 29682
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY COURT AT LAW
216TH DISTRICT COURT
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Nicholson, seconded by Commissioners Williams, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease
10-427-494 Special Court Reporter + $152.31
10-427-415 Special CCAL Judge - ($152.31)
10-435-494 Special Court Reporter + $1,281.39
10-435-415 Special District Judge - ($1,281.39)
ORDER NO. 29683
BUDGET AMENDMENT
DETENTION MAINTENANCE
JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioners Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-515-350 Maint. & Custodial Sup.
10-515-451 Detention Repairs
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $633.53
+ $49.66
76-572-104 Detention Officers Salary - ($683.19)
ORDER NO.29684
BUDGET AMENDMENT
216th DISTRICT COURT
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioners Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-435-402 Court Appointed Attorney's
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease
+ $8,946.60
10-435-417 Special Trials - ($8,946.60)
ORDER NO. 29685
BUDGET AMENDMENT
JiJVENILE DETENTION FACILITY
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioners Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
76-572-333 Resident Medical Expense
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $2,636.17
76-572-104 Detention Officers Salary - ($2,636.17)
ORDER NO.29686
BUDGET AMENDMENT
COUNTY AUDITOR
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioners Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Amendment
Expense Code Description Increase/()Decrease
--- 10-495-102	Official Salary +	$1,885.52
10-495-103	Assistants Salaries +	$15,113.76
10-495-201	FICA Expense +	$562.94
10-495-202	Group Insurance -	($6,731.00)
10-495-203	Retirement +	$1,110.23
10-495-206	Bonds +	$92.50
10-495-553	Contract Fees -	($9,571.87)
10-495-563	Software Maintenance -	($2,462.08)
ORDER NO. 29687
BUDGET AMENDMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
NON-DEPARTMENTAL
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioners Williams, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-640-570 Capital Outlay
10-409-207 Unemployment Ins.
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease
+ $16,435.00
- ($16,435.00)
NOTE: This grant is a reimbursement program (we spent first then bill
AACOG for reimbursement).
ORDER NO. 29688
BUDGET AMENDMENT
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, PCT. #2
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioners Nicholson, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-456-108	Part-Time Salary
10-456-105	Secretary Salary
10-456-202	Grouplnsurance
10-456-499	Miscellaneous
Amendment
Increase/QDecrease
+ $870.96'
- ($209.96)
- ($561.00)
- ($100.00)
*-To cover salary expense for training of new JP Clerk.
ORDER NO. 29689
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 8th day of May, 2006, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 the following monthly reports:
Sheriffs Department
Environmental Health