1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Regular Session
Monday, February 12, 2007
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, CommissionerPCt. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4
c~
2-iz-o~
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
z
I N D E X
February 12, 2007
--- Commissioners' Comments
1.1 Consider/discuss, approve resolution for submission
of 2007-08 Victims of Crime Act grant proposal
1.2 Consider/discuss Juvenile Probation Department
utilizing two temporary classrooms attached to
the original detention facility
1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
expenditure report from Juvenile Detention Facility
1.4 Information presentation on proposed Texas Rangers
History and Education Center, Kerrville, Texas
1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve
making application to Department of Justice for Safe
Haven Project, approve MOU between County and Hill
Country Crisis Council
1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve
proposed scope of work to determine remedial actions
required to repair Flat Rock Lake Dam
1.9 Public Hearing on Revision of Plat for Lots 5 & 6,
Shalako Estates Addition
1.11 Public Hearinq on Revision of Plat for Lot 96 of
Kerrville South II
1.6 Report to Commissioners Court on status of
investments made under section 887 (b) Probate Code
1.7 Changing department name of Kerr County Collections
1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action concerning
Revision of Plat for Lots 5 & 6, Shalako Estates
1.12 Consider/discuss take appropriate action concerning
Revision of Plat for Lot 96 of Kerrville South II
1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve
Revision of Plat for Lot 124B & 131A, Falling Water
1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
concept plan to Revise Lot 14, Tierra Vista
PAGE
6
8
11
18
26
36
48
68
68
69
69
73
73
80
80
2-iz-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
3
I N D E X (Continued)
February 12, 2007
1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve concept of Rockin Bar S
1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
preliminary plat of Estates at Johnson Creek
1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
preliminary plat of Ranches on Sunset Ridge
PAGE
83
91
93
94
1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to declare
county property as surplus, authorize disposal 97
1.20 Consider/discuss,
approve contracts
Tierra Linda, Elm
Hill County CASA,
Brothers and Sist
contract, & allow
1.21 Consider/discuss,
implementation of
take appropriate action to
with Turtle Creek, Comfort,
Pass, Center Point, Divide VFD's,
K'STAR, Dietert Claim, Big
ors, Alamo Regional Transit
County Judge to sign same 101
take appropriate action on
the burn ban 102
Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
proposed contract advertising rates with local
newspapers, authorize County Judge to sign
approved contract(s) 103
1.23 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on 2006
Racial Profiling Report from David J. Billeiter 106
107
1.25 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
amend interlocal agreement between Kerr Emergency
911 Network and Kerr County 114
1.26 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
authorize County Judge to file a claim on official
bond of Kerr County Treasurer for penalty, interest
and related cost incurred and/or paid by Kerr County
resulting from late payment of payroll taxes to IRS
due for quarter ending June 30, 2006 117
z-iz-o~
4
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
I N D E X (Continued)
February 12, 2007
1.27 Consider, discuss and take appropriate action to
set public hearing to abandon, discontinue and
vacate Louise Ehler Road as county-maintained road
1.28 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve
resolution supporting proposed legislation to remove
expiration date, Special Condition 5E, from Permit
No. 5394A, authorize forwarding same to appropriate
legislators
1.29 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve and forward letter with questions
concerning Groundwater Availability Modeling to
Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District Board
of Directors
1.30 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
ratify and confirm County Judge's approval of
County Treasurer Mindy L. Williams' bond
1.35 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
proposed resolution supporting design and
engineering plans for proposed new or replacement
USDA laboratory facility in Kerr County
4.1 Pay Bills
9.2 Budget Amendments
4.3 Late Bills
4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports
3.1 Action taken on items discussed in Executive
Session
Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee
Assignments
--- Adjourned
PAGE
122
124
126
131
132
134
140
141
142
144
145
149
z-iz-o~
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
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, ladies and gentlemen. Let me
call to order this regular meeting of the Kerr County
Commissioners Court scheduled for this date and time, Monday,
February 12th, 2007, at 9 a.m. It is that time now.
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Would you stand
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, if there's any member
of the public that wishes to be heard on any matter that is
not a listed agenda item, you're free to come forward at this
time. If you wish to be heard on a matter that is a listed
agenda item, we would ask that you fill out a participation
form. They -- hopefully there are some at the back of the
room. That helps me to have a heads-up if there's someone
wanting to speak on that item. If there are no forms, or if
you fail to fill one out and we get to an agenda item and you
wish to be heard, if you'd call or get my attention in some
_-iz-o~
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
way or fashion, I'll be glad to recognize you on that item.
But if there's anybody that wishes to be heard on anything
I have a couple of
things I want to mention. This evening, I will be going out
to Upper Turtle Creek Volunteer Fire Department and doing a
presentation on an ESD, and I'm pretty excited about that, and
so are they. And I see this as a -- one of the steps of our
plans of furthering volunteer fire departments and -- and
doing it in the right way as far as funding is concerned
and -- and organization, so I'm pretty excited about that. I
mentioned Rex Brand in my prayer. Rex has cancer surgery this
coming Thursday, so y'all lift him up and his family. I tried
to get the doctor to let me assist, and I couldn't get it
done. But -- and then tomorrow night is the Tivy boy's last
basketball game, and before and after, they're honoring our
good friend, Jim Reid. After almost 40 years of winning
back-to-back state championships there, K.I.S.D. has decided
it was kind of time to give him some recognition. So, that's
tomorrow, and they're -- you know, he's won four as a coach --
one as a player and four as a coach, state championships as a
coach, and they're having all four of his state championship
trophies there, and kids from Dumas and just all over the
z-iz-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
7
state of Texas are coming down here to help honor him, and
free cake. So, you guys, if you all don't have -- I know
y'all don't have much to do in the evenings, so there's that
function. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing much, Judge. I'm
looking forward to the Ranger presentation this morning, and I
don't want to delay this proceeding. We're going to be here
till midnight as it is, anyway.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quick comment, going back to
the -- Commissioner 1's prayer. He must have had some rain
that we didn't get. We've just had a lot of fog.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I changed it to
"moisture."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Moisture. But -- and in that
area, it's getting real dry again. Springs have really
dropped off. We thought it was a little bit wetter, I think,
in the eastern part of the county than it actually has turned
out to be, and we need to start watching those things pretty
closely. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't think I'll delay this
very long, either. Just had -- last Tuesday, we had a
committee meeting on the Highway 39 bridge project, the
z iz-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
8
We met with
Falls, I took him around, showed him all the projects. He was
very enlightened by what he saw, because he didn't know what
it really looked like, why people were so mad, but now he
understands. And they are really -- TexDOT's working very
hard with the citizens to make some concessions and make the
projects the best they can be. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. We've got a lengthy
on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and -- and approve the
resolution for the submission of the Victims of Crime Act
Grant proposal for 2007-2008 to the Office of the Governor,
Criminal Justice Division, the purpose of the grant being to
fund the Kerr County Crime Victims Coordinator program for an
additional year. Ms. Lavender?
MS. LAVENDER: Good morning. This is the -- will be
Bruce may not, but the -- this is a federal grant that's
funded through the Victims of Crime Act that pays for the --
my salary and the program that we have, and we've had grants
for the last two years. This is just a reapplication or a new
z-iz-o~
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
application for a new grant. The County's responsibility in
this grant is to pay the health insurance and provide office
And it's an 80/20
And I don't
crime victims coordinators, and I worked with one woman up in
Mason for a little while, but basically it's all Kerr County
victims. And we'll be going Wednesday morning, day after
tomorrow, to AACOG to present the community plan. Tn the
community plan to the CJAC committee at AACOG is the
priorities for funding, and one of these is this program. And
you have to have a resolution to go with the grant
application.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item and the resolution. Any question or
discussion? Ms. Lavender, how many projected or proposed
victims, as it were, did -- did the folks that oversee the
operation of this grant believe that you would have during 'the
course of the grant year?
MS. LAVENDER: Well, in the grant application I have
to project the number, and I projected 175 in the last grant,
-iz-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
10
and we far surpassed that.
JUDGE TINLEY: And --
MS. LAVENDER: I had no idea -- of course, we went
back -- when we started the program two and a half years ago,
we went back and picked up victims that were in the previous
years that still had cases pending in the courts, and so those
people have been addressed as far as we could address them,
and now all I'm doing is just the new cases that are filed.
And it's -- you know, there's an increase particularly in
family violence cases this year, or has been this last year.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, the need has -- is far in excess
I of --
MS. LAVENDER: Oh, yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- of what was originally projected?
MS. LAVENDER: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the dollar value of
the amount you're asking for?
MS. LAVENDER: Last year's grant, I believe, was
41,000. I don't -- don't know for sure yet what the numbers
are going to be. We're going to look at salary -- Eva's
working on looking at the salary for this year for next year's
grant, because we had some problems with the salary the first
year, and then this last year. I think it's going to work out
okay, but we want to build into the grant enough to be sure
z-iz-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
11
that if I decided to retire somewhere down the road and you
And we need to do
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank you,
MS. LAVENDER: Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 2, if we might.
Consider and discuss the Juvenile Probation Department being
able to utilize the two temporary buildings, those being
classrooms, attached to the original detention facility;
buildings would be used by the Juvenile Probation Department
to continue programs and activities such as Probation
Assisting in Education, parenting classes, drug and alcohol
counseling and similar uses. Mr. Stanton, good morning.
MR. STANTON: Hello. How are y'all doing? I was
approached by the Chief Probation Officer, Mr. Davis. Right
now, they're using one of the front classrooms to hold all
these programs in -- or hold their Probation Assisting
_-:z-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
12
Education program in. And at this point, they've got so many
we thought about trying to move their programs over into the
main building, the old building that's not currently in use,
but then it was brought to my attention that we would have to
heat and cool that whole building, and that just didn't seem
like a -- a good idea. Then we looked at the possibility of
using the temporary classrooms in the back of that building.
They are set on their own heating and air conditioning cycles;
they've got their own, so it wouldn't cost as much in
electricity to heat and cool those older -- or the portable
buildings in the back. And so I come to you today to ask
permission to allow the Juvenile Probation Department to
access those two portable buildings in the back to run their
programs out of.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, before the Court
contacted me this past week. I believe she had a phone call
to you as well. They're looking for space, T.Y.C. is, and she
asked if our facility was still available. I've talked with
Kevin about this, and she and her folks are coming down this
Thursday. I will conduct a tour of the big facility with a
view toward their thinking about leasing it. So, I think the
z-iz-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
13
Court needs to know that. That's all I can share with you
this morning. Don't have any other particulars, except
they're looking for space, and we have space. I don't know
how that might impact the plan that -- that the Probation
Department is -- is putting forth here, but the Court needs to
know that this is a possibility.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Stanton, can those -- can that
building, that portable building that was used by K.I.S.D.,
can that be accessed either independently of the entire rest
of the operation, or through the new portion that you
currently have in operation for preadjudication?
MR. STANTON: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's only accessed through the old --
the old portion that's not presently being utilized?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. STANTON: There's not any access points on the
outside of the gates. It's surrounded by a fence, and the
only way you can access it is walking down the main hall and
directly through the main building.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does this issue with T.Y.C.
-- would it affect your plans at all? i
MR. STANTON: It would. If T.Y.C., I believe -- and
this is just -- I haven't talked to anybody, but my impression
z-iz-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
14
would be if T.Y.C. leased that building, T.Y.C. would be
utilizing the main walkway, and I doubt very seriously they
would want our kids walking down the middle of their walkway
getting back to the back classrooms, because you'd have to
walk right through the middle of the dorm areas to access the
classrooms.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wouldn't think we'd want that,
I either.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
MR. STANTON: No, I don't either.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we're talking about --
we're talking about either serving our local probation office
or trying the make some money. Is that the bottom line?
JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe we -- is there a way a separate
access to that building could be created?
MR. STANTON: You could -- you could cut a gate in
the -- the outside fence, kind of like what they've got set up
in the new building.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MR. STANTON: You could access it through that way.
Except the only problem with that would be, you would be
putting a gate in the recreation area that T.Y.C. would be
utilizing for their kids, and you'd have to make sure that
T.Y.C., if they lease that building, didn't have a problem
z-iz-o~
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
with there being an access gate back there.
JUDGE TINLEY: So there may be a solution, depending
upon the -- the degree of need of T.Y.C., and whatever that
states out to be?
MR. STANTON: If they take the building, yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, could I suggest that
we -- that we allow this visit to take place this week and see
what -- what their desire is, and then if they don't look
favorably upon it or don't wish to pursue it with Kerr County,
then we can move forward on Mr. Stanton's request.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there a time framework that
you need a -- you know, these buildings used?
MR. STANTON: No, sir. It's a -- the programs -- I
believe Mr. Davis is here, but the programs, I believe, are on
Tuesday -- Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday nights are the
nights that they'll be utilizing those buildings. And then
for their new program, the 4-H program, they would be
utilizing that building too, and I'm not sure what nights or
days they would be utilizing it for the 4-H program. But, no,
sir. I mean, we -- we can make access and make room for them
to continue the programming that they're doing in the new
building, like we are. They'll just be really cramped for the
time being.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Any way the Ag Barn could be
z-iz-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
16
used for a classroom?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For those classes? I don't
know.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Why don't you look into that?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: See if it becomes a problem
with scheduling with some of the things that are already
planned to happen at the -- but that's a big -- you know, a
big room. It looks to me like you could meet. It'd be a
possibility. It may not work, but it's just a thought.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you want to look at that,
and if you would also explore whether or not there's another
way, as the Judge suggested, that -- of providing an entrance
that doesn't -- that doesn't in any way affect the security of
the facility.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Take a look at both, and
we'll put it back -- I'll have some information later this
week, and put it back on the agenda next time.
MR. STANTON: Sounds good.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think we need to find out really
what the feelings are about T.Y.C., what their desires are,
what portion of that they want to utilize, what they wouldn't
have a need for, what our options are. I don't think we know
them all at this point.
z-iz-o~
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, we don't know them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do they pay the same as other
counties, or do they pay more?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, they'd be talking
about leasing the facility and operating it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, we're not talking about a
per-day --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. We'd be talking about
them taking over the facility, we leasing it to them, and we'd
have to determine what the fair market value of that would be.
And then they'd have to staff it and run it. We're not
talking about running it for them; at least that's not my
understanding.
JUDGE TINLEY: We don't know what they got in mind
yet. They're going to be down here later this week. Maybe
they'll give us a better clue.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I guess I'm -- you know, the
-- well, we'll just find out. Probably -- there's a
possibility we may have to change some things out there,
better security. I mean, do they run under different rules
and regulations than we do?
MR. STANTON: Well, from my understanding from what
we're talking about here, is -- is it would be two separate
and total different programs. We would continue to fund the
Juvenile Detention Facility in the newer building. T.Y.C. --
z-iz-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
18
and the only thing that I think that we would have to work out
with T.Y.C. and the sharing part of the whole deal is the
sallyport, where we deliver the kids. And I think that's the
only -- the only two things we would have to share. Although
there -- one other thing we'll have to look at is the -- as
far as washing and drying the kids' clothes, because right now
we're still utilizing the washers and dryers in the old
building. And if T.Y.C. would -- would take over the old
building, we would then need to find some way to clean the
kids' clothes that are in the new building.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. Appreciate it,
Mr. Stanton.
MR. STANTON: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else on the Court have
anything further to offer on that? Thank you, sir. Let's
move to Item 3, if we might. Consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on expenditure report from the Juvenile
Detention Facility. Commissioner Baldwin, you asked that this
item be placed on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I did, thank you. Last month
he was kind enough to come in and give us a financial report,
but he only gave us the income side of it, and I thought it
would be wise, and the public certainly should have access to
the expenditure side, so I want to hear the rest of the story
now. Is this that report?
z-i^-o~
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
19
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir, it is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can you kind of give us a
brief -- I'm a bottom-line guy; if you can just go straight to
the bottom line, I'm happy.
MR. STANTON: The bottom line is that currently, we
are -- we should be right at 66.33 percent of our budget
used -- or remaining at this time. We're at 66.95, so we're
actually above where we should be as far as expenditures are
on our budget, our total budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Spending more than you
should?
MR. STANTON: No, we're spending less.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. STANTON: By about three-tenths of a percent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the expenditures -- the
expenditures are basically right on track, and the revenue
side were up?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we're doing better than we
had projected.
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
'. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Super.
MR. STANTON: The first page is kind of -- looking
at your deal, the first beige is a breakdown. The rest of it
is just breakdown, line item by line item, of the expenditures
z-iz-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
20
for each line item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you see -- projecting into the
so far this fiscal year, do you see any -- any anomalies in
the expenditure side that may be a problem where we have to
kind of anticipate?
MR. STANTON: The only -- the only expenditure
problem that I -- I foresee that we're going to have to move
money around in is in our copier lease -- our copier lease.
That's the only thing that --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the only one?
MR. STANTON: That's the only one we're running
were trying the burn off some comp time and vacation time, but
I see that that's going to lessen the farther we go into the
year. And right now, like I said, the only -- the only
problem I see is our copier line item, and it's going to be
short, and we're going to have to move some money around to
cover that. One of the things that I've been talking to the
Auditor and the Treasurer, Ms. Williams, about is that our
part-time money was -- there was a miscommunication between my
department and the Treasurer's office about where the
part-time money was to come from, and they were paying it out
of -- they were paying it out of the Detention Officers line
z-iz-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
zl
item -- salary line item, when it should have been coming --
it should have been coming out of the Overtime line item,
which is 108, and it was coming out of 104, so we're going to
have to make some adjustments to move some of the money out of
109 down into 108 to cover what's been paid out so far.
JUDGE TINLEY: But even with that adjustment --
MR. STANTON: Even with that adjustment, we're fine.
DODGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How about compensatory time,
Kevin? Have we worked that all off? We had a large --
MR. STANTON: We're at zero. Everybody out there is
at zero at this point. We -- we are like all the rest of the
county, where we are paying it off every other -- every other
pay period. We're -- we're zeroing out our comp time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's our current census
I out there?
MR. STANTON: Today we're at 12.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many?
MR. STANTON: 12.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All Kerr County?
MR. STANTON: No, sir. No. In fact, this last
month, in January, we probably had more out-of-county kids
than we had Kerr County kids.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: "Out-of-county" meaning
other hill country counties?
iz-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
22
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions for Mr. Stanton?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you for your report. I had a
participation form on this particular agenda item. Mr. Trigo,
you wish to be heard on Item 1.3?
MR. TRIGO: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you'll come forward give us your
name and address, please, sir, and tell us what's on your
mind.
MR. TRIGO: My name's Steve Trigo. I reside at 165
Scenic Valley Road. And I was astounded, Commissioner
Baldwin, to hear that report last time about Juvenile
Detention. I'm going to ask you, do we have an itemized
report on expenditures there?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
MR. TRIGO: We do?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
MR. TRIGO: Okay. That's -- that was my concern.
And then again, do we have any kids from Kerr County in other
juvenile detentions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
MR. TRIGO: Okay. What's the reason for that?
2-iz-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
23
JUDGE TINLEY: They're in long-term programs.
MR. TRIGO: None other than that?
JUDGE TINLEY: Not that I'm aware of, unless they've
MR. TRIGO: How would we find that out?
JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect Mr. Davis would know.
MR. DAVIS: Just -- Your Honor, currently, the Kerr
County Juvenile Probation Department has no -- in fact, since
I've been in place, our preadjudication children, meaning
children that are with matters pending before the court, we
only utilize the Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility,
strictly. That's the only facility we use. The other
placements will be postadjudication. This will be a child
that has been placed on probation by the Court, and they're in
some -- a treatment facility, an educational facility, a
mental health facility, and services that are not offered by
Kerr County. Therefore, we have to go outside of the county
to place those child -- children so that they can receive
those services.
MR. TRIGO: I can understand that. Another --
another subject that was brought up in the last meeting also
concerning the Juvenile Detention Center, it was stated that
we had no kitchen and no laundry facilities at the detention
center. As of right now, how much money are we spending on
-iz-a~
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
24
those items per -- per kid?
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- let me try and answer this,
and Mr. Stanton may be able to help. As he just indicated,
the laundry facilities are in the older portion of the
facility which is not currently being utilized, but which
they're utilizing that portion of it in order to do their
laundry needs for the preadjudication facility that
Mr. Stanton is operating. The kitchen is over in the old
section, but because of the number of meals, Mr. Stanton has
made arrangements -- he's on a contract basis with the Kerr
County Law Enforcement Center; the -- the jail kitchen, as it
were. And he acquires his meals for his residents out of the
jail and they're transported over to the Juvenile Detention
Facility.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then he pays -- his budget
reimburses the Sheriff's Department.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, yeah, sure. There's a contract,
~ right.
MR. STANTON: Can I -- there is one meals section,
sir, there also, is that the kids, during -- during the school
year, during the school days, Monday through Friday, and
Kerrville ISD provides the breakfasts and lunches for the kids
for free.
MR. TRIGO: Okay. I have a question for
Mr. Emerson, since he -- being the County Attorney. Are we in
-iz-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
25
compliance with governmental codes and state laws as far as
not having a kitchen for the Juvenile Detention Center?
MR. EMERSON: My response to that, Mr. Trigo, would
be I don't know off the top of my head, but that's also not
part of this agenda item.
MR. TRIGO: But, I mean, since you are the -- I'm --
I'm concerned, are we in compliance with the government codes?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're not out of compliance.
MR. TRIGO: We're not out of compliance?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We are not out of
compliance.
MR. TRIGO: You're not?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We are feeding our children
what they're supposed to get, the kind of meals they're
supposed to get. The cost per capita, per meal, is cheaper
than it was before.
MR. TRIGO: Okay. That's all I have for you. Thank
you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir.
MR. TRIGO: Oh, another question. Why can't -- why
can't Kerr County taxpayers get an itemized report of -- put
in the paper so that they -- they are the ones that are paying
for this, and I think they should be made aware of what the
expenses are.
JUDGE TINLEY: All that information is available,
z iz 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
26
Mr. Trigo. You've just been handed a copy, and --
MR. TRIGO: I know.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- if you want further backup
information, it's available through -- through our county
offices, the Auditor's office, the Treasurer's office, and --
and Mr. Stanton out at the detention facility. He inputs the
raw data, and that's where this came from. That agenda item
is backed up -- or each of his line items on his budget is
backed up by a separate page. If you need further
information, it's available to you. Thank you. Anyone else
have anything to offer in connection with that particular
item? Thank you. I can't see the clock, but I think it's
about 9:30, so --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's 9:30.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- we'll get to a timed item, and
we'll have an information presentation on the proposed Texas
Rangers History and Education Center located here in wonderful
Kerrville, Kerr County, Texas. Mr. Joe Davis? Good to have
you with us here, sir.
MR. JOE DAVIS: Thank you. Good morning, Judge,
Commissioners. And, for the record, I am Joe Davis. I'm
current president of the Former Texas Rangers Foundation. I'm
a former Texas Ranger, and been a Kerr County resident for 27
years, and it seems like I only moved here yesterday. When
you live in the hill country, I think time goes by a little
z-iz-o~
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
quicker than you want it to, 'cause we are lucky and fortunate
to be here. And first I want to say -- I want to thank you
We're not here
really to ask you for anything. We just want your support and
goodwill on this project, and this project will be a -- a good
facility for Kerrville. I'm going to call on two people.
I'll just briefly state a few words here and then call on some
other people to tell you how it's going to affect Kerrville
and what it's actually going to be, because it is going to be
a state-of-the-art facility. It will tell the true history
and heritage of the Rangers, and when you do that, you learn
the history of Texas. And so many people has played a part of
being a Ranger right here in Kerr County. A lot of people
don't know that Joseph Tivy was a Texas Ranger, buried up on
this hill up here. And many citizens of the past were, and
they're -- a lot of them are buried out at Center Point there.
I'd like to introduce some of our people that are
He's from
Worth, if you don't know. Patti Kaminski is our events
coordinator. Some of you have been to a Silver Stars and Six
Guns gala; they've been a big success here in town. People
-iz-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
28
come from all over the state and out of state to attend. She
is the coordinator of that. Leslie Klein, who's one of our
directors, manager of Ranch Radio. Chad Stary; he'll be
speaking in just a minute. He's regional president of State
Banks in several cities. He resides in Gonzales. Anyone else
I've missed here?
AUDIENCE: Grady.
MS. KLEIN: Grady's at the door.
MR. JOE DAVIS: Oh, Grady Sessums, retired Texas
Ranger. He's now a resident of Kerr County, and he's on our
board. So, without further ado, I would like to call on Joe
Dial. He's going to come forward and give you a brief
description of what this project's all about.
MR. DIAL: Thank you, Joe. Judge Tinley, Honorable
Commissioners, Commissioners Court staff, and esteemed
citizens of Kerr County, my name is Joe Dial. I am the
chairman of the Board of Directors of the Former Texas Ranger
Foundation. I appreciate your interest in learning about what
will soon be one of the premier themed entertainment and
educational destinations in Texas. This is an artist's
conception of an architectural drawing of what the facility ~~
will look like. The next slide, this is a conceptual drawing
of the -- the main entryway and -- and the exhibit area. The
Texas Ranger History and Education Center will be located on
Highway 173, with frontage on the Guadalupe River. The center
z-iz o~
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
z9
will be a respected repository for Texas Ranger history, while
at the same time being one of the most entertaining and
educational themed entertainment venues in the state.
who are now former Rangers like Ranger Davis and Sessums, the
lineal descendants of Rangers like myself, the widows of Texas
Rangers, and the legions of supporters, like yourselves, of
the Texas Rangers who know why those four words capture the
heart and soul of the legend that is Texas -- the Texas
Rangers. As a lineal descendant of Texas Ranger Bill Dial, I
know that for 184 years, the Texas Rangers have had the
courage to put their lives on the line every day to maintain
law and order while performing their duties with the highest
degree of integrity. They have exhibited dogged determination
to keep on a'coming in the face of overwhelming odds, while at
the same time respecting the rights of all people, which, in
turn, has earned them the respect of law-abiding citizens.
They have been dependable in getting the job done where others
have failed.
Courage, integrity, determination, respect, and
dependability. These five character traits and others that
Rangers adhere to are told over and over again in the true
stories of Ranger experiences. There is no other law
-iz-o~
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
]1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
bring the legend that is Texas to life with scenes in the
exhibit area that you're seeing a conceptual drawing of, that
are action-packed, realistic, exciting, and thoroughly
entertaining for people of all ages. You will want to bring
your friends and family to the center time and time again.
Part of the display area will be -- will have new stories to
tell every few months. The center will display Texas Ranger
history in a way it has never been done before, anyplace. The
Texas Ranger History and Education Legacy Theater, which will
be at the top right there, the Legacy Theater will introduce
visitors to a brief overview of Texas history. They'll smell
the smoke of the campfire, they'll feel the rain, they'll hear
the thunder and lightning. In the battle scenes, they will
hear the whizzing sound of the bullets or arrows going past
them.
They will leave the Legacy Theater eager to
experience the details of how the Texas Rangers helped shape
the history of Texas. As they walk through a timeline display
which follows out of the Legacy Theater all the way throughout
the exhibit area, which will be over 8,000 feet, that exhibit
will cover nearly two centuries. One will be captivated and
emotionally moved by the most entertaining and inspiring
stories ever told about the Texas Rangers. The journey
z-iz-o~
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
visitors will take through the center will be an unforgettable
Ranger value system, a code of honor that has captured
people's attention for 184 years and gained worldwide
admiration. Every visitor to the center and school children
in 813 school districts across Texas will see and understand
why Texas Rangers are looked up to as role models, and how
young and old alike can be better citizens if they, too,
practice admirable character traits.
The center will have a Director of Education and an
advisory committee of 4th and 7th grade Texas history
teachers. Together, they will develop curriculum enhancement
tools tied to TEEX requirements for Texas history. By using
the Texas Education Agency's telecommunication network, we
will be able to go into thousands of classrooms via the
Internet. Texas history will come alive for students as they
see and hear realtime, on monitors in their classroom, Texas
Rangers in period dress explaining the role Rangers played in
Texas history from 1823 to the present. The presenter that
will actually be in the exhibit -- in a particular area of the
exhibit will be able to see the students in a classroom in
E1 Paso, Texas, or in Houston, Texas on a monitor that will be
sitting off to the side in front of the presenter, and the --
z-iz-o~
32
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
and that individual can answer children's questions as they
raise their hand in their classroom.
David McCullough, a noted historian, twice winner of
the National Book Award and the Pulitzer Prize, has said
history isn't something that just ought to be taught -- or
ought to be read. It ought to be experienced, because it'll
make us better citizens. History will make us a better
citizen. Kerr, Bandera, Gillespie, and Comal Counties have
produced some of the best Rangers to ever wear the Texas
Ranger badge. Rangers battled Indians and outlaws in these
four counties as they protected the lives and property of hill
country pioneers. Even now, there are 119 Texas Rangers
across Texas who lay their lives on the line every day for you
and me. We welcome the support of the Kerr County
Commissioners Court as we raise the capital funds and build
the center. When the center is open, you can take pride in
being a part of telling the true story of the Texas Rangers,
and have the personal, individual satisfaction of knowing your
efforts will motivate thousands of people to become better
citizens. Thank you very much for your time.
MR. STARY: Morning, Judge, Commissioners, staff.
Thank you very much for allowing the Former Texas Rangers
Foundation Board the time and privilege to present our program
to you. Texas Ranger History and Education Center will be the
only one like it in the United States of America. As you can
z-iz-o~
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
33
see through what Chairman Dial said, there will be nothing
My name is Chad Stary, a
he Foundation. I'm also
regional president of State Bank. My background includes
being the president of the Gonzales Economic Development
Corporation, so I totally understand the working relationship
between local governments and capital enterprises, especially
in large economic projects as this. We stand here today ready
to build that relationship and to continue the legacy of the
Texas Rangers and its monumental economic impact of what a
multi-million-dollar draw this will bring. It will be a
premier heritage tourism attraction, and heritage tourism
draws more people who spend more money than any other tourism
of its kind.
Hit the slide. Our estimated project costs on this
project are about $8 million. As you can see, the land is
going to run 480,000. It's paid for. The building costs are
estimated at 4.3 million, furnishings at 85,000, and permanent
exhibits and programs of $3 million. And then fundraising,
development, and operations of half a million, so our project
now that we're looking at is about $8.5 million. We've had
much support from the Kerrville citizens. We've had five
successful annual galas, each being more successful than the
iz o~
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
every year; they send their money in to provide for this
project. We've also had celebrities and corporations that
have supported this. Last year alone, we've had many gun
manufacturers. Most of the majors were here, our state reps,
and all sent guns to support our project.
Next, these are our timelines. Groundbreaking
hopefully in 2007, completion between '8 and '9, and then our
grand opening would be in 2008 and 2009. As I mentioned
earlier, we've received much financial support from prominent
folks and corporations, most notably the Peterson Foundation,
the Burnett Foundation, the famous Four 6's Ranch, the Taub
Foundation, the McCombs Foundation, Frost Bank, J.P. Bryar. of
Torch Energy, and we have an active grant writing campaign in
place.
Slide 3, please. The center itself will bring a
from San Antonio, the Y.O. Ranch, James Avery, the summer
camps. We feel like this is going to be a great draw in
addition to this area. It will be family-friendly, as it will
be the center of the character of Texas and the Texas Rangers.
As Mr. Dial stated in his presentation, we anticipate this
bringing a family aspect to Kerrville, along with economic
impact, and we believe that anytime you can bring families in,
z-iz-o~
35
1 we ca
2 groin
3 and a
4 allux
5 antic
6 enfox
7 open.
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Slide 4, please. I think this is the most important
slide that we can present to you today, is what the economic
impact that we estimate the center to bring to Kerr County,
the surrounding counties, and the city. We anticipate 55,000
additional visitors to the city. We figure an average family
of four, that will be 14,000 families. A two-night stay in a
motel is $150. Gas, $90, one tank -- excuse me, meals of $90.
And, again, this is before a seven-times multiplier, which
most economic models work on. And we would greatly appreciate
any future support and goodwill that the County would provide
to our foundation and to this area. And as you can see, that
any support that you could grant us would be easily paid back,
quickly. Thank you very much for allowing us the time to come
today. Appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further?
MR. JOE DAVIS: Nothing further, Judge, unless you
2-iz-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
36
have any questions. We'll be glad to answer.
JUDGE TINLEY: I want to thank you gentlemen for an
extraordinarily fine presentation and the work that you're
doing. This is a fine, fine project, and I note that -- I
know one face toward the back of the room, former Ranger from
right here in -- stationed in Kerrville, Henry Ligon. I want
to welcome him. Good to see you, Henry.
MR. LIGON: Good to see you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions? Thank you. We
appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you very much.
MR. JOE DAVIS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all have to charter a bus
to get around? (Laughter.) That's part of the economy here,
too.
MS. KLEIN: Thank you.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's move to Item 5, if we
might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
approve making application to the Department of Justice for
Safe Haven project and to approve the memorandum of
understanding between Kerr County and the Hill Country Crisis
Council. Ms. Howard, this matter was presented to us earlier
on a nonbinding letter of intent I believe that the Court went
2-iz-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
37
forward on, and you're here seeking final approval. Is that
my understanding?
MS. HOWARD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We got all that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Ms. Howard, we already have
copies of all this.
MS. HOWARD: Do you?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes, ma'am. You might need it
for something else.
MS. HOWARD: All right. Thank you, Judge. Sheryl
Howard with the Hill Country Crisis Council. This is a
follow-up on our presentation to you last week. This -- what
you have before you today is the final -- the really final
project narrative and budget on this application. Just to
recap, this is an application to the U.S. Department of
justice, the Office of Violence Against Women, for a $400,000
three-year grant to create a safe haven, a supervised
visitation/safe exchange program for children who are in
custody situations by virtue of abuse or neglect, or domestic
violence situations where a court has ordered supervised
visitation. The requirement of the D.O.J. grant is that a
unit of local government must make application and partner
with a victims' services provider, which in this area would be
z-iz-o~
38
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
us, and so we came to you and asked you to allow us to submit
what we discussed last week in terms of the scope of the
project, but I did want to talk to you just a bit about the
budget side, 'cause that's the part that might raise some
questions when you have a chance to look at it. One of the
provisions of the grant, of out of the $400,000, is that
$50,000 had to be set aside for Office of Violence Against
Women, O.V.W., technical assistance, mainly travel, and at the
time, it appeared from reading the grant application packet
that that meant that O.V.W. was coming to us or that this was
to pay for their technical. I was in error. What that is is
for us to travel to them, $50,000 worth. I talked to them and
several people in the Department of Justice about this, and
they said, "Well, we really can't tell you where the technical
assistance trainings are going to be. On average,
organizations go to at least three a year, send two or three
staff persons to each session. Do the best you can. And we
can't even tell you where they are, but in the past, we've had
them at these cities."
So, I went online looked at airfares and hotels and
year, and I came up with $22,000, and that's rich. As I
z-iz-o~
39
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
explained in the budget narrative there, that our intent would
be to reduce that amount, but the requirement of the
application is you must set aside $50,000. So, I finally took
the other $27,000 and said, "All right, I'm putting it in the
budget 'cause that's what's you told us to do, but you're
going to have to tell us how to spend this." So, if they do
make us spend $50,000, which is a huge amount of travel money,
I guess we're all going to be traveling during that three-year
period. Otherwise, it's about $349,000 worth of direct client
services. It's a very efficient and cost-effective program,
because most of the overhead expense is handled by the Hill
Country Crisis Council without charges to the project, and
takes advantage of the existing victims' services that are
provided by us and by others in the community, again, at no
charge to the cost of the project.
There's no cost to the County on this -- the
project, and the memorandum of understanding that's presented
to us specifically states that we do not look to the County
for funding during the project grant cycle, or in the
sustainability plan for continuation funding. I think the one
question that was asked in the budget was from the County
Auditor, about the possibility of triggering a single audit as
a result of the grant. Again, there's about $148,000 max
flowing through the county on this in any one year. What I
did do is go ahead and put $1,000 in the budget towards county
_-iz-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
40
expense if that would occur. There may be more funds
available; I don't know, and I don't know if that's sufficient
or not for the -- the project portion of a single audit, if
that were to be created.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Probably not.
MS. HOWARD: Probably not? I don't know what your
audits cost. So, anyway, if there are any other questions?
The -- the request is that you approve the application and the
memorandum of understanding.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And both of those are due
tomorrow?
MS. HOWARD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If my memory serves me.
MS. HOWARD: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Howard, there's an issue of -- of
accountability that the County has, as the applicant in a
grant, that all of the procedures and -- and the
administration of the grant are being conducted in accordance
I with the terms of the grant and -- and the requirements of
law. As you might imagine, there's some concern on our part,
if we're having to make a representation under penalties of
law that things are being done, and we're the applicant, but
we're not in control. How do you propose that we handle that?
MS. HOWARD: Well, in terms -- you mean in terms of
operating the supervised visitation program itself, or in
iz-o~
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
l5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
terms of managing the money, or all of it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Just complying with the grant
generally. The County, as the applicant, would have the
responsibility to insure that the grant is administered
properly, in -- according to its terms.
MS. HOWARD: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the County then would have the
obligation, in the event that did not occur, that the County
would -- would suffer the consequences, and generally that's
-- they ask for return of the funds.
MS. HOWARD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think I referenced --
excuse me, Ms. Howard. I think I referenced this to you,
following up on the Judge's question, last time when we talked
about performance measures and standards, and how -- how we
measure the performance of the operation or how it's being
measured, and does it comply with the performance requirements
of the grant.
MS. HOWARD: Okay. In the grant application kit, it
gives you the site to the specific performance measures, how
it's -- how they are reported, and the forms to report it on.
Those are required to be submitted to the Department of
Justice every six months. Our proposal to you all is that we
would send you both the performance report and the financial
report every month, and so that you can see -- and then -- and
_-iz-o~
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
42
then it's a cost-reimbursed contract, that we don't get paid
until the service has been done, and that you would have an
accounting for that on each -- on each month.
JUDGE TINLEY: Should D.O.J. come back to Kerr
County, as the applicant, and say, you know, we've -- sometime
after the fact, and say, "We don't believe this is accurate,
or things were not done according to the terms of the grant,
and we're seeking reimbursement for all or some portion of the
funds under the grant," what would -- I know what Kerr
County's obligation would be under the grant. We'd be under
the gun and obligated for it. How would we handle that
relative to your administration of these funds?
MS. HOWARD: Well, that's the same situation the
Crisis Council finds itself with all of its government grants,
whether it's through the Attorney General's office, managing
moneys from the Center for Disease Control or the Governor's
office, managing Department of Justice funds, among other
funding streams, or the Health and Human Services Commission,
using Health and Human Services funds. There is provision in
the memorandum of understanding that says the Crisis Council
will indemnify the County for any, you know, callback on
funds.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we have that M.O.U.?
MS. HOWARD: It was in the original black book that
iz-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
43
I gave you last week. That has not changed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Have you had an opportunity to
discuss that with our County Attorney?
MS. HOWARD: Yes. And he -- he received a copy of
the book, and I understand that you made comments back to the
Judge? Is that --
MR. EMERSON: The green notebook, Judge -- or black,
that I forwarded up to y'all with a number of post-its on it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MR. EMERSON: I haven't seen it since then, but
that's -- that was my initial review.
MS. HOWARD: That was the last draft. I haven't
gotten any comments back from anybody.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the issue of indemnification,
that's covered?
MR. EMERSON: That was covered in there. I believe
I had a question as to whether or not y'all would require the
Crisis Council to take out a bond or something to that effect.
I seriously doubt the Crisis Council has several hundred
thousands dollars in reserves if something were to go wrong,
and a bond's pretty inexpensive to cover that issue.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That sounds like a good
approach. How does -- how do the funding -- the funds come to
z-iz-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
44
the County?
MS. HOWARD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the County disburses them
~ monthly?
MS. HOWARD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, no, you draw down,
right? Based on performance; is that correct?
MS. HOWARD: Yes. In other words, we submit -- we
submit a statement to you, and then you submit it on to the
Department of Justice.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, essentially, we're
talking about a three-year deal, and the maximum each year
would be about $124,000; is that correct?
MS. HOWARD: Well, it doesn't break out quite like
that. The first year is limited to $50,000. That's the way
the grant is set up. And then the next few years are about
$150,000 a piece.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ms. Howard, my concern is --
we spoke earlier. As always, when the grant plays out, when
the government says, "No more, you have to get your money from
somewhere else," what -- I'd hope that you don't expect the
taxpayers of Kerr County to just automatically pick that up
and take off running. Do you have some kind of safety net at
this point, or a plan in place to pick up where the government
leaves off?
2-iz-o~
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
45
MS. HOWARD: Well, being a nonprofit, we do what we
do in every project area, and that is that you develop a track
record, which would be what the first year of implementation
would be. So, Year 2 of the project, and then at that point,
you take that information and that success and you start
So, you've got several
possibilities. You've got private grants. You've got the
possibility of continuation of the U.S. Department of Justice
grant. They are certainly doing that at their demonstration
sites and other sites they've funded in prior cycles. Private
fundraising, and then project fees. But those -- both the
memorandum of understanding and the grant application itself
to the Department of Justice makes it very clear that we are
not looking to the County for any continuation of funding.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MS. HOWARD: So they will be evaluating it knowing
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That makes me very happy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Have you discussed with -- with your
MS. HOWARD: I have not. And I would have to rely
on Mr. Emerson's assessment that it -- you know, a couple of
hundred dollars to buy a bond like that. I can't see a
z-iz-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
46
problem with -- with going forward in it. My board meeting's,
unfortunately, not till tomorrow night, so it's not something
But --
Probably the best safeguard is
MS. HOWARD: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. HOWARD: I would be happy to take that to them,
was requesting that we put this piece in place as well," and
I -- I don't have a problem with that.
JUDGE TINLEY: I certainly think that's a viable
option; that -- that in order to give some -- some strength to
any indemnification, I would think it would be --
MS. HOWARD: If it's --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- open to at least consider.
MS. HOWARD: You can go ahead and make this
requirement and -- and submit the application, if you're in
agreement with the rest of it, and then I can take it to the
board. And meantime, we'll figure out how much it's going to
cost. If they say no, we'll just withdraw the application.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It can probably be a
requirement of the memorandum of understanding, don't you
_-i^-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
47
think, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As opposed to the grant
application.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is -- the application is
here, so I would presume if it is funded, there's going to be
paperwork to come back to be signed by the County Judge.
MS. HOWARD: Up until -- there's a lot of additional
assurances and boilerplate things about drug free and
employment sites and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Some of these other -- these
issues could be addressed at that point, prior to signing the
actual commitment. We need to make sure we're on board before
we send in the application, but that would be the time we'd
require the -- you know, you can talk to your board, and if we
get the bond in place prior to that, we'll sign the agreement.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move for approval of
the agenda item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and second for
approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? All
in favor of that motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
z-iz-o~
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
48
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank you
very much, Ms. Howard.
MS. HOWARD: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're on a short fuse on that, and --
MS. HOWARD: Whenever it's convenient for your
schedule, Judge, I have all the copies here for your
signature.
	JUDGE TINLEY:	Okay.	Maybe when we get to the break
here	in just a little bit, that	might be an appropriate time.
That	may be the only convenient	time in the --
	MS. HOWARD:	Okay.	
	JUDGE TINLEY:	-- imme	diate future.
	MS. HOWARD:	Thank you	very much.
	JUDGE TINLEY:	Thank y	ou. Let's go with Item --
	COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS:	Eight. It's 10 o'clock.
	JUDGE TINLEY:	Okay.	I can't see the clock from
here,	is my problem.		
	COMMISSIONER	BALDWIN:	There's 30 seconds before
10:00.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll go with Item 8, a timed item
for 10 o'clock. Consider and take appropriate action to
approve a proposed scope of work to determine remedial actions
required to repair Flat Rock Lake Dam, estimated cost of
$18,000, with funds available in Flood Control Account Number
22. Commissioner Williams?
z-iz-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
49
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. What you
have before you is a letter proposal submitted to me by Stefan
Schuster of Freese and Nichols with respect to how we proceed
stuff in here, most of which I don't understand, but I'll --
I'll concur -- I'll agree that maybe the other Commissioners
do, and I just don't. But, Stefan, if you'd be so good as to
talk us through this and tell us where your firm
responsibilities lie, and -- and who we may have to engage
otherwise to get this project moving?
MR. SCHUSTER: Thank you, Commissioner. Morning,
For the record, my name's Stefan
We went ahead and did a
of the history. One of the problems was to find the original
actually that we did a Phase I inspection report for the Corps
of Engineers in 1978 on the facility. There were several
destructive events at the dam since its construction in 1956.
There was -- in 1959, one of the embankments washed out;
further stabilized at that point. Then T.C.E.Q. -- or the
Water Commission's inspection happened in 1970, 1974, and in
1976. In 1976, the inspection found very similar problems to
z-iz-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
50
what we see today; several small leaks and some cracks. And
we went ahead and we made a recommendation in 1978, on our
later, we see some of the same similar repairs. One of our
recommendations at this point is to go a little bit further
and look at the actual integrity of the concrete cap above the
earthen dam. One of the things you introduce when you
actually pump grout beneath the concrete cap is the ability of
the cap to float off the earthen dam; one of the reasons we
may have water coming in underneath the cap. So, our primary
recommendation before any -- before we go forward with any
real repairs is to look at the actual integrity of the cap and
to look at where the voids are. And, fortunately, in the 30
years that we did that last inspection, technology's come a
long way. One of the things you see before you in the
proposed proposal is to do an NDT, a nondestructive testing
method, where we don't have to drill holes in the cap. We
basically run a ground-penetrating radar machine across the
surface of the dam. It will tell us where the voids and where
the cracks beneath the cap are, so we can actually target
where to pump the grout beneath the cap without having to do
major repairs. And that's really where -- that's really the
?-i?-o~
51
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
gist of our -- of our letter.
Several options that you can do here. First of all,
extreme expenses down the road if we don't do something. The
second option is to go through a bidding -- competitive
bidding process. The Engineering Act mandates that if it's
over $25,000 of expenses, then we need to go out for
competitive bid on the particular project. And then the third
option would be to break the project into several different
phases, and it's really sort of the recommendation that I'd
like to make to you here, that we break this into several
phases, and we begin with the nondestructive testing and the
survey of the -- the dam to further assess exactly what type
of damages is there and what type of process we need to
address to fix it. I don't think either one of those are
extremely expensive.
We estimate that the nondestructive testing of the
And then we would have some sort of fee for -- for observing
and supervising those -- those operations, and then making a
recommendation for a construction or a repair phase that would
come further down the road. And what that might be, we just
don't know until we have a further idea of how much damage
there is beneath the cap. So, our recommendation at this
_-iz-o~
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
point is to move forward with doing the nondestructive
ground-penetrating radar assessment of the dam. We look at
the problems, and then we make a recommendation on what needs
to be done to fully repair the cap with grouting or some other
process based on the testing results.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go ahead, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Radar assessment? Was that
the term you used?
MR. SCHUSTER: Right, assessment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May I use "X-ray"?
MR. SCHUSTER: Sure, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. When you X-ray,
you keep talking about -- using the word "cap."
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, is that -- are you
referring to the concrete hull over the whole thing? Or just
the cap on the top?
MR. SCHUSTER: No, sir, the concrete hull over the
earthen dam. Beneath the dam is an earthen dam.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right.
MR. SCHUSTER: And so the impoundment is basically
made of clay and dirt, and it has got about a 6-inch concrete
cap over the entire thing. Part of the integrity problem is
-iz o~
53
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 water's washed underneath and started washing some of the
earth out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Same thing that happened --
MR. SCHUSTER: 30 years ago.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- 30 years ago.
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And what -- what was -- what
did the County do back then?
MR. SCHUSTER: At this point, it's unclear. I need
to see what you have in your records, because we were not
hired to supervise the work, to do the work, to do the
grouting. But somebody did do the grouting. It's obvious
that that was done, and that's one of the reasons we're
recommending that nondestructive testing with the radar
penetration of the cap, to see if we can assess where the
damage is and where the -- the grout has been put in place
previously. Because one of the dangers is that the grout may
actually float the cap off the earthen dam, and we want to
prevent that from happening.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you'll find that
Slumberjet actually did it.
MR. SCHUSTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe that's correct.
MR. SCHUSTER: And if that's correct, we
certainly --
z-iz-o~
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There is some data or some
documents available at Road and Bridge; I think there's a file
out there with respect to what Slumberjet did back whenever it
did it. There are a couple questions, however, Stefan, I
really want to ask --
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- with respect to this
project. You talk about the upstream concrete slab could be
evaluated if the reservoir could be lowered temporarily to
allow access to the testing equipment. What the testing
equipment would be doing, absent lowering the -- the level of
the lake, would be to take a look at the downstream side and
the top; is that correct?
MR. SCHUSTER: Correct. That is correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we would not be
assessing any of the integrity of the upstream wall?
MR. SCHUSTER: We would be able to assess probably
the first 5 or 10 feet of the upstream wall, but in order to
get at the very base, we would need to -- to move the water
off the dam a little bit.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, it would require
lowering the level of the lake all the way to the bottom to do
that, or what?
MR. SCHUSTER: In order to do the front side of the
dam, we would have to -- and we could do it in stages, where
_-iz-o~
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we could actually sandbag a portion of the river and then just
move across as we do the testing. But --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In your considered opinion,
would that be a necessary thing to do?
MR. SCHUSTER: It would be the best thing to do,
yes, and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, "best" --
MR. SCHUSTER: It would be necessary, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In order to get the full
integrity, and that's really what we're after here, is -- the
idea is to find out exactly how damaged the cap may be or what
the structure underneath is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with him, that needs
to be done. If you're going to X-ray the dam, X-ray the dam.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't -- I'm not arguing
that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Got to figure out how to
drain the lake.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does your cost estimate include
X-raying the entire dam?
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir. That's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Both sides and the top?
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it doesn't -- or does it
-iz o~
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
include anything for figuring out how to lower the lake?
MR. SCHUSTER: We can certainly -- we would
certainly figure that out. And I think --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We know how to do it; it's just
a matter of doing it.
MR. SCHUSTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause we think the plug's under
a lot of gravel and mud.
MR. SCHUSTER: Absolutely. No, I -- we would
certainly make a recommendation on how to do that, and I think
that's certainly something that could be done in the first
phase.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But that would be
incorporated into the -- into the fees that you're -- that you
believe would be appropriate?
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Based on the proposal of
January 23?
MR. SCHUSTER: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. A couple other
questions come to mind. You talk about the firm being
selected -- NDT firm would be selected and engaged by us.
That would be a separate contract?
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Actual survey performed by a
z-iz-o~
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
firm engaged by Kerr County Commissioners, talking about
establishing survey requirements for the layout of the work.
That's a separate firm, or is that the same firm?
MR. SCHUSTER: It's usually a separate firm, and we
prefer to use somebody local. I'm sure there's some --
there's a surveying firm here in Kerr County that can do it at
an affordable rate. It's really just a matter of grading the
dam so that they'd be able to know where to go.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Item 6 talks about
coordinating additional investigative procedures if supporting
soils are deemed incapable. Those investigations would be by
firms engaged by the Court. That would be, again, a separate
firm?
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Item 8, observe all concrete
repairs performed by a contractor engaged by Kerr County.
That would be the actual repair, and that obviously would be a
separate firm?
MR. SCHUSTER: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. SCHUSTER: And that's where I'm making the
recommendation we break it into phases and do an assessment
phase to look at the dam, the nondestructive testing, the
survey, and the overall management of that process. And then
take the Phase II in terms of the construction, what needs to
z-i2-o~
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
be done to fix it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wouldn't see how you could do
it any other way. I don't see how you can fix it without
knowing where the problems are.
MR. SCHUSTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can't.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Ain't going to work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it's -- to me, it has to be
a two-phase project.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And along with that, back
when we did it before, in the mid-1800's I believe, I just
happened to be a County Commissioner here, and we did Ingram
Dam at the same time and X-rayed it, and actually found larger
cavities out there than we did at --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Flat Rock.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- Flat Rock Dam. So, may
want to consider at least X-raying Ingram Dam while you're
there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any economy to doing
two dams at once?
MR. SCHUSTER: Absolutely, but particularly with
this firm, since they're out of state. They're considered the
best in the business. I did ask that question of why we would
use some somebody from Colorado, but they really are the best
z-iz-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
59
in the business. And in terms of the technology being
available in the state of Texas, the University of Texas
certainly has ground-penetrating radar capabilities, but they
do not have the expertise of having done that on dams. So, I
think in terms of efficiencies, bringing an out-of-state firm
in to do the work that specialize in that work would certainly
add efficiency to have them do two dams while they're in the
county.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Only thing I can say about it,
the timing is off. I would -- I remember very well the last
time that we lowered the level of Ingram Dam -- Ingram Lake,
it was done during the spawn.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And the Bass Club did not like
that very much. So, that needs to be done as a wintertime
project, like November-December.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: In my opinion, I think you
have the same problems in both lakes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In terms of lowering the
lake?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Lowering it or draining it,
wherever -- whatever you're going to do to it. You need to do
that in a non-spawn time of the year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Off-season.
z-i^_-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
60
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And that preferably, I
believe, would be November, December, January, but no later
than the first of February. Need to be completed and filled
back up by the first of February.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, he's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we have before us a
proposal for Freese and Nichols. I've asked the County
Attorney to tell me whether or not we could proceed on the
basis of an engagement of Freese and Nichols to do the work
that's outlined in the letter. Did you concur with me? I
believe you did.
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. And while there's not
a -- a quote of price in Mr. Schuster's letter, there is an
Attachment C which details a number of hours his firm would be
doing these various functions for Kerr County. And I forgot
what the total was, but at -- at the rate that I know to be
their -- their current rate, it would be something under
$18,000 to get the scope of work underway that's detailed in
this letter.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that does not include the
survey work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, we'd have to get a price
on the survey -- on the --
MR. SCHUSTER: We'd have to get the final pricing,
-iz-o~
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
but I believe that that's -- the 18,000 is in the ballpark.
Should be close. It does not include the construction or
repairs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, okay. Everything up to
that point.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The NDT work is included in
the 18?
MR. SCHUSTER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, that's better yet.
Okay. But that's not for two dams.
MR. SCHUSTER: That's not for two dams, no, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, might have to be some
adjustment to that.
MR. SCHUSTER: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: How long do you think it might take
you to get some reasonable idea of what the efficiency to be
gained would be if we did the Ingram Dam at the same time?
MR. SCHUSTER: Potentially by the end of the week.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, based on the -- the
timing that Commissioner 4 brought up, why don't we -- we can
enter into -- if we need to enter into it today, we can enter
into it and get the ball rolling. That gives you time to get
the surveying done as it can get worked in. You can do -- we
can figure out how we're going to get that plug pulled, which
is not going to be an easy task in Flat Rock, I know. I'm not
_-iz-o~
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
sure about Ingram.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's not bad in Ingram.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ingram's not --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Ingram's used to doing it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because I think it's going to
take a little bit of diving to even find it at Flat Rock, as I
recall.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Probably take some diving
and digging.
MR. SCHUSTER: Yeah. Even in the 1978 report, it
said it had been inoperable for several years. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, there's a lot of work to be
done -- done that's got to be done. And, you know, even
though we're not doing the major work until next winter, it
certainly would make sense to start on it out of this budget
year. It's coming out of dedicated funds, as Commissioner --
Commissioner Williams --
JUDGE TINLEY: And we would have the option, as it
gets more information, to go ahead and do some add-on while
these people are either en route or the other processes are
being done.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We certainly don't want to have
this same discussion about the same time next year.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner Oehler, you
_-iz-o~
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
talk about protecting the spawning season, and I appreciate
that. What would be the earliest, based on the spawning
season of spring, that we could begin to get into the work?
In the summertime?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Summertime, but then that --
that's recreation time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's true.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That doesn't work in my
precinct at all.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it doesn't work here,
too, as to -- because we have two parks, people who are here
for recreation at two separate parks.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right.
MR. SCHUSTER: And there may be ways -- I'm
certainly no expert, but there may be ways to actually clear
the dam with some mechanical ways without actually draining
the lake, to where we build a barrier of some sort, or have
another way to be able to block the lake without totally
lowering the lake level. So, that -- that might be another
option.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They don't have waterproof X-ray
equipment that they can slide on the surface with divers?
MR. SCHUSTER: Well, certainly one of the problems
is they're using ground-penetrating radar, and that surface
interface with the water will give a different signal, so it
2-iz-o~
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is part of needing to get the water off the top of the
concrete.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If they were really good, they
could probably figure out a way to do it.
MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, sir, I absolutely agree with
that. Totally agree with that. Also have a great sense of
I confidence that if Slumberjet did the previous repairs, that's
good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Certainly not a unique problem.
Now, the cost might get prohibitive going underwater, but I
would suspect there's probably equipment available.
MR. SCHUSTER: And it's not a huge portion -- on
Flat Rock Dam, it's not a huge portion of the dam that would
need to be surveyed underwater, so it may not be a problem, I
agree.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I had asked the Auditor's
office to take a look and see where we could find $18,000,
'cause this certainly is not a budgeted item, and the repairs
are not budgeted either, and we've identified Account Number
22, which is a -- a Flood Control account in which there are
currently about -- unencumbered, about $78,000. So, there is
sufficient funds available in that account where we could get
this work underway, and if the Court is of a mind to do that,
I also asked the Auditor to prepare a budget amendment, which
we take can take up at the proper time to do that.
z-iz-o~
65
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what do we need to do today,
or next meeting, whenever?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think probably
today, I would ask the Court to -- I'd like to make a motion
to approve the scope of work as outlined in the proposal from
Freese-Nichols to get this thing underway, and determine what
is going to be required in terms of -- of estimating our
damage that is to be repaired. I would amend my original
proposal from just Flat Rock Lake to include Ingram Dam as
well, and that would be the sense of the motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second for
approval of the agenda item, to include Ingram Dam also. Any
question or discussion on that motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The County Attorney has
~ something.
MR. EMERSON: We may have an issue if we get over
25,000, gentlemen.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I'm --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, yeah, there's no
question about that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you want to back off on your
motion to just do Flat Rock at this point?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we bring it back next
~ meeting?
z-iz-o~
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I can -- I can just
have it done as Flat Rock and then get the estimate, and then
we'll see where that takes us. Will that work?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The reason I say next -- this --
the letter we have goes all the way through the repair cycle.
Clearly, we're only doing -- this may be, you know, confusing
in the future. We really only are going down through Step 4.
MR. SCHUSTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we get a new letter
next week that we can -- that does exactly what we're going to
do, and at that time they can have time to look at Flat Rock
and get an idea if we can do it all at one time, rather
than --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's okay. Can you do
that for me, Stefan?
MR. SCHUSTER: Absolutely, no problem.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Because it's got to stay under
25,000 or we're going to have to go out for proposals.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, that's fine.
MR. SCHUSTER: Be happy to do that.
~~! COMMISSIONER LETZ: I withdraw my second.
', COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I withdraw the motion.
i
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Or, being that Flat
z-i^-o~
67
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
Rock Dam affects the new city park, I'd -- I'll bet you that
they'll want to participate in the cost of this thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I bet they will,
particularly on the repair side.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, absolutely. This is --
this is really exciting; you see government working together.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see that as a great
potential.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Especially if it gets lowered
during their peak time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May want to think about that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It has crossed my mind.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do we have anything else to
offer in connection with Item 8?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, Judge. I'll wait for
Stefan's revised letter.
MR. SCHUSTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll put it back on the
agenda for next meeting.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir.
MR. SCHUSTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you for coming out,
Stefan. Appreciate it.
MR. SCHUSTER: No problem.
JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, I will recess the
z-iz o~
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commissioners Court meeting, and I will open a public hearing
concerning the revision of plat for Lots 5 and 6 in Shalako
Estates Addition as set forth in Volume 5, Page 66, Plat
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed
at 10:19 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
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:19 a.m., and
the regular Commissioners Court meeting was
reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: And I will open a public hearing
concerning the revision of plat for Lot 96 of Kerrville South,
Section II, as set forth in Volume 4, Page 64 of the Plat
Records of Kerr County, and located in Precinct 1.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed
at 10:20 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
z-iz-o~
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
Lot 96 of Kerrville South, Section II, as set forth in Volume
4, Page 64, Plat Records of Kerr County? Seeing no one coming
forward, I will close that public hearing, and I will
reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting of this date.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:20 a.m., and
the regular Commissioners Court meeting was
reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: And we will go back to Item 6 on our
agenda and receive a report from -- from the County Clerk of
the status of the of investments made under Section 887 (b) of
the Texas Probate Code.
MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, this is just a report that I
am required to give once a year. This just shows the amount
of investments, interest paid, the total balance to-date, the
name of the depository, and the type of investments on each of
the accounts.
JUDGE TINLEY: Other than giving us the report, do
you need the Court to take any formal action acknowledging
receipt of the report?
MS. PIEPER: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you for your report, ma'am.
MS. PIEPER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 7, if we might, to
change the name of the Kerr County Collections Department.
Mr. Alford?
_-iz-o~
70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ALFORD: Yes, sir. Over the last six months to
a year, especially through the tax season, our department has
apparently created a lot of confusion with the taxpayers
coming in trying to pay their taxes in our department, because
of the "collections" part of it. We had a gentleman come in
last week, wanted us to foreclose on a house and collect his
back rent for him; numerous other situations throughout the
year. Talked to the County Attorney's office, talked to the
Office of Court Administration in Austin. And throughout the
state, you're seeing departments that actually physically do
not collect the money getting away from the "Collections
Department," because under the Code of Criminal Procedures,
our department is not allowed to collect money. For that
reason, they're starting to come up with -- Judicial
Compliance, Court Compliance, Court Enforcement are mainly
about the top three or four. So, we come to y'all today to
see if we should change our name just to stop the confusion,
or what we should do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Get the term "collections" out of
there, huh?
MR. ALFORD: At this point, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think "Court Enforcement"
could be confused with "Code Enforcement."
MR. ALFORD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Which is another department,
z-l,-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
71
so I'm scratching that one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like "Judicial Compliance."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do too.
MR. ALFORD: That's fine. We thought about -- our
', top one was Court Compliance, keeping us in with the courts
and compliance to their orders. That was kind of our -- our
pick.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Court Compliance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion we change the
name of Kerr County Court Collections to Kerr County Court
Compliance.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, we're going to all get
jackets and T-shirts and bumper stickers?
MR. ALFORD: And that's something else. This
probably won't go in effect anytime soon because of business
cards, letterheads, envelopes. Whenever that runs out, as it
runs out, then we'll change it over. I don't want to spend
the money to do everything at once.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why don't you give us a date
when that's going to happen? What month are we in right now?
JUDGE TINLEY: Two.
-iz-o~
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ALFORD: February.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: February.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: June 1?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: June 1? May 1?
MR. ALFORD: June 1, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: June 1.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Put a sign on your door
first.
MR. ALFORD: Okay. Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've got a motion and a second as
indicated to change the name of Kerr County Collections to
Kerr County Court Compliance effective June 1. Any further
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can't figure why he gave us
choices. We chose a different one; he didn't like it. Why
didn't he just give us one choice?
MR. ALFORD: Always leave the door open.
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
III (The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
MR. ALFORD: Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 10; consider,
z-iz-o~
73
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
discuss, and take appropriate action concerning revision of
plat for Lots 5 and 6 of Shalako Estates Addition, as set
forth in Volume 5, Page 66, Plat Records of Kerr County.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The concept for this division
property was considered on December 19, 2006, and the owner
has proceeded as requested by the Court. Therefore, I
recommend the revision be accepted as presented.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 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. We'll move to
Item 12; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
concerning a revision of plat for Lot 96 of Kerrville South,
Section II, as set forth in Volume 4, Page 64, Plat Records of
Kerr County.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Concept for this revision also
was done in December of '06. These lots currently share the
same well, but there's a public water system available. And I
recommend that you approve the concept to be done under the
alternate plat process.
_-iz-o~
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: "Alternate plat process"
meaning what?
MR. ODOM: No preliminary. That we would --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do we do about the water
issue?
MR. ODOM: The water issue is that they have water
there; that they can get the water. This situation was where
they -- he had a mother in there, and that she passed away.
And the father has been sent to a nursing home, I believe.
And the gentleman wants the option to sell this. There is a
community water system out there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's also a well shown,
isn't there?
MR. ODOM: There is a well, and that gentleman's on
the well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we don't have a shared
well. We did have a shared well.
MR. ODOM: You did have a shared well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we still may, because we
had approved this before the new rules came in. Is that what
we're saying?
MR. ODOM: Well, we're saying that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that what we're saying,
Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm still trying to figure out
_-iz-o~
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
how we get to a .84-acre lot.
MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, do what now?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How we get to a lot that's less
than 1 acre.
MR. ODOM: Because when we presented this before,
that it was an easement, and he had to dedicate it to the
county, so therefore the lot was reduced back down from over
an acre-something to eight-tenths.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that be the 30-foot
right-of-way that's shown? Is that what you're talking about?
MR. ODOM: Well, that 30 foot is to the center of
the roadway.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that what you're talking
about?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, that's what I'm talking about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, they own land --
MR. ODOM: To the center of the roadway, and so he
had to give that up to the county, which reduced it less than
the 1 acre that we presented to the Court before.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. My other question is --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's answer my question
before we get off on a bunny trail. Did -- do we have a
shared well issue? Shared well issue?
MR. ODOM: Prior to this? Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: After we vote to do this
z-iz-o~
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
76
thing today, will there be a shared well issue?
MR. ODOM: Should not be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. ODOM: No, sir, because it will be somebody
other than a relative.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MR. ODOM: And this was over 6 acres, which was
allowed a well. They didn't tie onto the water system. This
gentleman is going to keep his place, which he wants to do,
and to sell the other one. And it's to be not a family
member, but it will be -- another person will buy this, and
they will not share that well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember this now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one is being kept and
which one is being sold?
MR. ODOM: The residence, I believe, is the bigger
tract, the 5-acre.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: And the smaller is the one that the
mother was in.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is the smaller one -- has
that residence been hooked up to the public water system out
there?
MR. ODOM: No, sir, because it's vacant.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's just raw land.
z-l,-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
77
MR. ODOM: Just raw land.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- I guess if -- I vaguely
remember talking about that .16-acre, but I also thought that
we were going to reduce the 5.13-acre tract .3 acre to get
them as close as we could to 1 acre, an actual 1-acre lot, and
a --
MR. ODOM: I believe that you're referring that to a
different --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A different one?
MR. ODOM: 30 -- out 30 -- 27, which is the Bar S
situation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Different one, okay.
MR. ODOM: We brought a lot in together. This was
one that we discussed, but we discussed the fact that the
individual's mother had passed away and he was wanting to sell
that, you know, and just keep the larger part for himself.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other one is a -- I know
it's a picky point, but I'm really quite confused as to how
the same surveying company could get it right on one and not
right on the other; talking about "replats," which we don't do
in this county. We do revisions of plats. And we have made
other surveyors go back and correct that. The other one's
right, same company.
MR. ODOM: The other one's right. I'm sorry, I
z-iz-o~
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
78
missed that one. It's only 12 of them that I had at one time,
so I missed this one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it's not a --
MR. ODOM: But I do wish to say that in the English
language, the word "replat" is acceptable in the English
language.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's not in our Subdivision
Rules; it's not a defined term.
MR. ODOM: That is -- that is -- it depends which
one we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or state law.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is it in the official A & M
dictionary, Leonard?
MR. ODOM: Sir, it's about one page long.
(Laughter.) There's two pages -- there's two pages now, but
that's 30 years after the fact when I left.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. ODOM: I believe that the person tried to make
this work. And the well's on the 5 acres, and the other would
be -- would be a community water system.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I don't have a
problem with doing it. I'm wondering -- looking at Rex -- our
rules require a 1-acre minimum. This will -- even though
there's a reason here, and the part of the land that we're
allowing is under the road, wouldn't this require a variance?
_-i^_-o~
79
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
I mean, 'cause it doesn't meet our rules.
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have a real problem with
it, but talking about -- you know, about doing it that way,
but I think we need to say there is a variance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree that it does -- does
require a variance. Can we deal with the variance under this
agenda item?
JUDGE TINLEY: Part of the approval process would be
granting a variance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we approve this
agenda item and grant a variance from the 1-acre rule, and
that the concept be approved under the alternate plat process,
upon the recommendation of the Road Administrator.
MR. ODOM: I recommend that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. If I can make a -- I'll
second. Then I'll make a quick comment.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second as
indicated. Question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And they'll change the verbiage
on the plat?
MR. ODOM: I will get with Mr. Brandenberg.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or comment? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
^-lz-o~
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 13. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
approve revision of plat for Lot 124B and 131A of Falling
Water, located in Precinct 3. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The public hearing for this
revision was done on January the 8th, 2007, and Rex Emerson
was asked to give his opinion on whether it met the O.S.S.F.
regulations. The owner's combining two lots into one under
the alternate plat process. Enclosed is Rex Emerson's letter,
and it appears this meets all the requirements of Kerr County
Subdivision Rules and O.S.S.F. At this time, we ask that you
approve the revision of plat as presented.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? All in favor
of that motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Item 14,
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for concept
plan to revise Lot 14 in Tierra Vista as set forth in Volume
z-12-u7
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Number 4, Page 94, Plat Records, and located in Precinct 1.
MR. ODOM: You have -- this came in Monday, which
was late, but Truby put it on. And, I'm sorry, I have some --
the data that you show shows 50-foot easement. I asked Lee to
do this. We had talked, I believe, in January, I think,
wasn't it, Lee?
MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir.
MR. ODOM: In reference to doing this as a concept
to put it before the Court. This is in a private subdivision,
Aqua Vista out there; it's the back side of it. I questioned
when it was presented -- Wednesday is when I first saw this
last week -- of the 50 foot. Lee brought a new plat to me,
faxed it over, and it does show a 50-foot easement down
through Lot 13. You can see it was drawn in there, so there
was originally a road platted, 50-foot easement. It is
sealcoated; it is an existing road. It's been there since
1981, '82, when this was put together, and basically, it's
combining two pieces of property into one, which I don't have
a problem. There's a water system out there, and I wanted
your direction to Lee before we proceeded on. But --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The new piece of property
that's joining in is a part of this private subdivision?
MR. VOELKEL: No, sir, it's not. It's non-platted
land. It's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's outside the subdivision?
z-iz-o~
82
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. VOELKEL: Outside the platted subdivision, yes,
sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the piece that you're bringing
in?
MR. VOELKEL: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: To become part of Lot 14, and the
part that you're bringing in has that 50-foot-wide easement
with the existing roadway on it?
MR. VOELKEL: That's correct, yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is the road staying? Is the
road going to stay there?
MR. VOELKEL: Yes, it's actually a private road
easement. It's being used as a driveway to access Lot Number
13, and then also the adjacent land to the -- which is owned
by the owner of Lot Number 13; Mr. Bob Dittmar owns that whole
tract.
MR. ODOM: That whole tract, mm-hmm. And why it
wasn't platted before, I don't know. That goes way back into
the '80's. But you have existing land, and part of that land
was unplatted. And why, I don't know, but it wasn't platted,
and it's just bringing it into it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No problem. Certainly, this
cleans it up.
MR. ODOM: It cleans it up.
_-iz-o~
83
1
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: On behalf of my beagle and
her doctor, I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? All in favor
of that motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Item 15,
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to approve
concept of Rockin Bar S, and located in Precinct 4.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. As you see, I have several
questions, and some of these have been basically answered. I
did send some of this information to Rex prior to so he would
not be caught on -- on any questions. But this property is
1169.58 acres off what we maintain as Love Ranch Road, which
is way out there in the far end of the county, almost at the
county line. This parcel was sold -- Truby -- there's a typo;
it says May of 2000, but it actually was signed -- this parcel
went off November the 8th of 2000, granting an access with a
1 1/2-mile road easement, 30-foot road easement between Love
Road and the property. The developer wishes to divide the
tract of land into five or fewer parcels.
I have several questions. Since the easement was
iz-o~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
zo
21
22
23
24
25
84
established before December the 11th, 2000, is it
grandfathered? That has been the guide which the Court's gone
by. Second, can we require the 1 1/2 miles of 30-foot
easement to his property be upgraded? The information I got
from the County Attorney was it was similar to J.J. Road, and
what we did there is that the -- this individual does not own
that property. It was given outside another person that owns
that property, so the 30 foot's already given. We did not
make them upgrade J.J. Lane, so I would assume, taking that
information and what was sent to me, that we could not make
them upgrade the road, so that question is already answered.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We did require additional
easement on J.J.
MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. But he owned that
property.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. This is a different
situation, though. I mean, as I understand the J.J. Lane
situation, we have the authority to do it if it's
proportionate to the need of public good, essentially.
MR. ODOM: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And J.J. Lane, since there was
other access off Highway 27, the need was a little bit
questionable, whereas here, this is the only access.
MR. ODOM: Only access.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the easement on the
z iz o~
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
county road, Love Road? How wide is it?
MR. ODOM: Probably a prescriptive easement. I know
of nothing that's in there, so prescriptive easement, we would
assume that it's out there running around 30 foot.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. ODOM: Neighborhood road.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's paved all the way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a narrow --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's narrow. It's a narrow
road, not any wider than this 30 foot.
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And basically access from
Highway 27, I-10 to the back gate of Y.O. Ranch.
MR. ODOM: Y.O. Ranch.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Love Ranch to the Burris' --
MR. ODOM: The Burris boys lives at the back back
there, I believe. And we go all the way up to that fence
right there with that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm.
MR. ODOM: And this comes directly off that and goes
west.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This all was a family division
originally, I believe.
MR. ODOM: Original, that's it. They were
intermarried -- the Loves and the Burrises were married, and
z-iz-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
86
that's how this all --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Exactly.
MR. ODOM: -- came together.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, to me, clearly,
the -- I mean, clearly, the road has to get upgraded; the
easement road needs to meet our rules.
MR. ODOM: Say again?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The easement road, the
1 1/2-mile stretch, needs to be upgraded to meet our rules, to
i me.
MR. ODOM: 60 foot?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the road itself needs to
be upgraded.
MR. ODOM: Just the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The easement. Boy, I tell you,
now's the time to get more -- more easement if it's possible.
But if it's not possible --
MR. ODOM: Mark was here.
MR. SHERRON: I'm here.
MR. ODOM: I asked him -- I visited with him on the
phone, and he said they won't give it to him.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I encouraged him to try to do
that. He was -- he was going to hear back from them, but
evidently he wasn't able to get another 50 foot.
MR. ODOM: Under the 1.03, and that's the catch-all
z-iz-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
87
that we catch, they could divide that land up, and we don't
have any guidelines by the statutes -- by state statutes. And
we have never actually said in our Subdivision Rules. Then
this would be at least -- the minimum is 150-foot-wide area,
minimum. I think it would be -- would go out to 200 in the
number of lots on it, because if you look at the number of
lots on 1,100 acres, you're talking about the possibility of
200 lots. So, that's a 90-foot right-of-way in an arterial.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You lost me.
MR. ODOM: Well, I'm just saying that -- I'm saying
this narrow neck of land, we don't have anything -- they -- it
does -- there's no stipulation, so the 30 foot was given. And
so I don't know -- I don't have anything in the Subdivision
Rules that says that if you sell a piece of land under 1.03,
that you can do that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they're putting in --
MR. ODOM: They're only putting in five.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're putting this -- that
road, once you get inside the tract, it's got to be a 60-foot.
MR. ODOM: There's no problem with that.
MR. SHERRON: Right.
MR. ODOM: They understand that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: From here to here, there's no
problem getting 60, I think.
_-iz-o~
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the other part, if you can't
get it, you can't get it. But that's why we don't do it any
more; we don't allow the 30-foot easement any more, because it
creates bad situations.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the road can be upgraded. I '',
don't know why that can't road can't be --
MR. ODOM: Okay, that's the question. I felt --
that was my judgment, that I felt that road needed to be
upgraded just like the other one. It's going to be an unpaved
private road. And that I see -- I did get one of my
questions; do I have the authority to look at that material?
I know that material out there is acceptable, 'cause Bob Love
gave us material there, so I know it's pretty good material
out there to build a road with.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Makes sense to me.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
MR. ODOM: We can do this under the alternate plat
situation. I understand the Commissioner has no problem
there.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I have no problem with it.
Size of the -- the number of lots makes it possible, and also
the size, I believe.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can do the alternate plat?
MR. ODOM: Under five lots, and they're proposing
-iz-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
89
four lots, I believe.
MR. SHERRON: It will be four or five. Five or
less.
MR. ODOM: Mm-hmm. Alternate plat processes says if
it's under five lots, we can go alternate plat --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under five, or five or less?
MR. ODOM: Five or less.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Five or less.
MR. ODOM: What was presented to me was four lots.
Now, under that I did give you the 7.06 and 7.08, and which
Mark needs to know that that is to be an unpaved country lane.
And it will be --
MR. SHERRON: Privately maintained.
MR. ODOM: And the restrictive covenants which he
said he's going to be putting in here shall be imposed on all
resulting tracts with frontage or access onto the unpaved
road, prohibiting any future resubdivision of any tracts into
lots smaller than 10 acres, unless first -- a road is first
constructed to county standards then in effect with paved
roads and accepted for maintenance by the County. No problem.
So, I put that in there to make sure that that was on record,
that if some of these other tracts subdivided, those
individuals are -- are to be upheld to a higher standard in
that road. It gets over eight lots.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree there.
z-iz-o~
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
MR. ODOM: And I can't do anything with 30 foot, but
they can upgrade that. You'll have to upgrade that 30-foot
easement there, that road there.
MR. SHERRON: To the county standards?
MR. ODOM: To the county standards.
MR. SHERRON: Being?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Country lane.
MR. SHERRON: Country lane.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unpaved country lane.
MR. ODOM: Unpaved country lane.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Be the same road standards, the
I whole bit.
MR. ODOM: Same as what you're going to be doing
I inside.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think, on country lane, in the --
rather than specifying the certain type of material, there was
discretion given to the Road Administrator also, was there
not?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. Yes, there is.
MR. ODOM: Right. And since it's smaller drainage
and stuff like that, it's not needed as far as the drainage
study and all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I move that we approve
the agenda item, a concept of Rockin Bar S in Precinct 4.
-iz-o~
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. 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. Why don't we
take a recess at this point and come back in about 15 minutes,
and we'll get back at it.
(Recess taken from 10:45 a.m. to 11:03 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if we
might. We'll resume our Commissioners Court meeting. Let's
go to Item 16; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
for the preliminary plat of Estates at Johnson Creek located
in Precinct 4. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. This has been before the Court
back in December as a concept. There are now two lots, 5-acre
lots, and one 2.61-acre lot with the existing house, well, and
septic, for an average of 4.74 acres. The road is to be a
privately maintained road. There are general notes here
saying all property owners shall mutually own and share in
common the wells, or any pre-existing wells. In accordance
with Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations, the
z iz-o~
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
subdivision is permitted up to four lots only. And it appears
that they have addressed all the concerns of the Court and
Headwaters. Therefore, I recommend the Court accept the
preliminary plat as presented.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And they just drilled a new
well; I saw it happen.
MR. ODOM: Sir?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They just completed a new
I well.
MR. ODOM: There was a new well up above on the
5-acre.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right.
MR. ODOM: And then there's a preexisting well on
the 2.61 acres.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right.
MR. ODOM: And then Lot 2 has 5 acres, so should
they at any time in the future sell, that this individual can
have a well. They can share it under -- under previous...
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move we approve the
preliminary plat of Estates at Johnson Creek.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item. Any question or discussion? All in favor
of that motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
z-iz-o~
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Item 17,
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for preliminary
plat of Ranches on Sunset Ridge located in Precinct 3.
Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. This is off Wilson Road there.
This subdivision contains 246.13 acres and has 10 lots, with
all lots being over 20 acres. The roads are to be built to
Kerr County standards for a local road to be maintained by the
County. Road profiles and road drainage have been submitted
to Wayne Wells for review. Mr. Wells will hopefully contact
our office before this meeting, and development should be able
to proceed. Since this time, Mr. Wells has gotten me a
letter. I sent this in -- this came before; this was
afterwards, that he really -- they -- there was no problems as
far as calculation profiles that were presented. There was
some suggestions, but there's nothing that would facilitate
not moving forward with any of it. It's maintenance type
comments. At this time, everything seems to be in order.
Therefore, I recommend this preliminary plat be accepted as
presented.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
z-iz-o~
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quick question. This will be a
county road?
MR. ODOM: This will be a County-maintained road.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
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. Item 18,
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to remove
landscape entry for Deerfield Subdivision located in
Precinct 2. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Is this -- do I have another one?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, 18.
MR. ODOM: Oh, yes, sir. I'm sorry. You notice
where my mind was. This is in Precinct 1.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Precinct 2.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Two.
MR. ODOM: Two. Some of the homeowners in Deerfield
Subdivision asked us to remove the landscaping and the road
right-of-way at the entry to their subdivision. We asked them
to circulate a petition to show that the majority of
z-iz-o~
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
homeowners are in favor of having it removed before we would
present it to the Court. There are 42 homes in the
subdivision. The petition was signed by 73; three refused,
and two could not be reached. This entry has a rock structure
and curbing with trees, posts, and grass, and sets in the
middle of a 100-foot road right-of-way. It's very wide right
there when you turn in, but right in the middle of it is this
obstruction. The roads in this subdivision are on the
sealcoat list for this year, so with your permission, we'll
remove everything and pave the area while we're working there.
You have a picture, I believe, that was with the agenda item,
and the petition that was sent around.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is similar to the one
we had out of that little subdivision behind The Woods --
MR. ODOM: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- a few years back.
MR. ODOM: Few years, where the Sheriff's Department
ran into it and knocked it down.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we took it down.
MR. ODOM: Right, and I fixed it back up.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Then I caught all sorts of
hell about it after that.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, you did. But it was
loving-type comments.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
z-i_ o~
96
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 BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item. Any questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, after you get it down and
cleaned up -- which I agree 100 percent; it's sitting right in
the middle of road -- what are you going to do? Are you going
to --
MR. ODOM: Asphalt it and sealcoat the thing so it
I will --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just be another --
MR. ODOM: Well, there may be -- we may be able to
look at something with some buttons or something like that.
But that has -- you know, I'll have to -- I don't know if it
will be this budget year, but maybe into the next budget year,
or be painted. I might do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Striping it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you're going to make the
entrance -- the road entrance wider?
MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. Take this -- it is
difficult to turn in. It's not a problem going out, but it's
a -- it really swings you out to the right, and it's really
tight. So, if we do that, maybe I'll take a look at it, and
maybe there's some buttons we might put in there. I've
contemplated that, or maybe some striping. Buttons would be
better, less maintenance.
z-iz-o~
97
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 BALDWIN: Yeah, you got a little sight
distance issue past it up there if you're -- if you're coming
from town and turning left into there.
MR. ODOM: Right, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Little problem there.
MR. ODOM: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you.
THE CLERK: We have a motion and a second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or discussion
on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to
Item 19; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
declare county property as surplus and authorize the disposal
of same through eBay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The eBay king, looky here.
MR. TOMLINSON: I -- you have a list before you, I
think. We just need to declare this list surplus, and I just
want approval from the Court to use this method to -- to sell
this property. I visited with the County Attorney, and he --
he's okay with it. As far as requirements of the law, we've
done some research and found that other municipalities do
_-i2 0~
98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
this. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- and the prices listed are
the minimums?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or reserve, whatever you call
I it?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Dealer reserves.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A question, just for
clarification purposes. Whenever the County has done this in
the past, and we -- we've conducted the bids, any County
employees that wanted to bid had to do some forms, or
something get filed, you know. If it's on eBay, is that a
requirement? Or --
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would not be? I mean --
MR. EMERSON: It's not a direct purchase, per se.
You're going through an Internet bidding organization.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
-iz-o~
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: I guess the question is, what happens
if the reserve is not reached on one or more of these items?
We come back to square one?
MR. TOMLINSON: We've done what's required.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: And the ones that -- especially the
computer equipment, if it's not purchased, we'll recycle it
through the Recycle Center over at the city.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And the others, you'll just
resell, say, as some sort of public venue, without reserve?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, I think it's -- I think we can
-- I mean, if we can find -- if we can find other
municipalities or nonprofits that can use anything, we can --
we have the right to -- we can donate it to those.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: We'll try that first. Leonard, you
had a question?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. I talked to a young man that
came by and was looking at our equipment. My understanding is
if we didn't hit the minimum reserve that we had, that I think
that we would have the right to change that reserve on eBay.
I don't --
MR. TOMLINSON: I think we do.
MR. ODOM: And so, you know, we may not get exactly
what's there, but we can see -- that was the impression I got,
z-i^_-o~
100
1
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 there would be a discussion with Tommy and all, and --
and with the departments on there, see where the highest bid°s
at, and see how close.
JUDGE TINLEY: On an individual basis, you'd have
the discretion to sell below the stated reserve, then?
MR. ODOM: That's right. On eBay, you do that. I
mean, they change the bid all the time if they don't get their
reserves, so I don't see why we couldn't do the same thing.
We're not going to know who's bidding, anyway. We're just
going to have a --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, but my point is, you want to
get rid of this stuff and get it out of here.
MR. ODOM: Get it out.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, actually, on prior sales,
we've never had a minimum.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I didn't think so.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, just take it out to the
Ag Barn and people make an offer.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's right.
MR. ODOM: But the problem was -- was $5 or $6 or
$10 for a piece of equipment, and that's -- that's not the
right thing to do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, but eBay's going to give you a
much broader market, so you're probably going to test the
_-iz-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
101
market better.
MR. ODOM: That's right, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What kind of residual does
eBay charge?
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't recall, Commissioner. It's
a percentage.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a flat fee plus a
small percentage. So, I mean, as long as items bring 15, 20
or more dollars, it's -- it's negligible, but if you sell an
item for, like, a couple of dollars -- a dollar or something,
I think it becomes more -- percentage rate's pretty high.
MR. TOMLINSON: We have set it up that there's no
freight to the County. It's --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MR. TOMLINSON: -- as-is, where-is.
JUDGE TINLEY: Where is. Okay.
THE CLERK: I have a motion and a second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion on
the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to
Item 20; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
_-i2-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
102
approve the contracts with Turtle Creek Volunteer Fire
Department, Comfort Volunteer Fire Department, Tierra Linda
Volunteer Fire Department, Elm Pass Volunteer Fire Department,
Center Point Volunteer Fire Department, Divide Volunteer Fire
Department, Hill Country CASA, K'Star, Dietert Claim, Big
Brothers and Sisters, Alamo Regional Transit contract, and
allow the County Judge to sign the same. I put this on the
agenda because we got these contracts stacked up here, and we
need to act on them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And these are contracts that
have come back signed by the organizations -- these entities?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussion on
the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
I
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 21, consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
z-iz 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
103
implementation of the burn ban. This is back up per the
90-day rollover provision.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move that we approve
implementing a burn ban, as we have previously done.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Same form.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And this is to implement the
Commissioners' right to make the choice?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Each Commissioner of each precinct
will have the option to implement or -- or remove it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is -- I mean, we keep it on
year-round.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or comment? We do
have a motion and second, don't we?
THE CLERK: Yes, sir.
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. Item 22;
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on proposed
z-iz-o~
104
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
contract advertising rates for local newspapers, and authorize
the County Judge to sign the approved contracts. I put this
on the agenda in order to try and get some benefit from a
contract rate. It appears, in looking at what's been
submitted, that really the only one that we get any benefit
from is the Kerrville Daily Times by a contract rate. In the
past, we've done 100 column inches per year. We get a 50-cent
per-column-inch break if we go to 250, but I don't know that
we'd get close to the 250, and we'd be stuck with paying for
that if -- if we were to make that commitment. But the other
publications in the county that might be appropriate for
publication of notices, the Community Journal and the West
Kerr Current, they have -- they already give us their best
rate. On a piecemeal basis or a whole bunch, doesn't make any
difference.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we need a motion? I'll make
a motion that we approve accepting the 100-inch contract rate
with Kerrville Daily Times, and the other designated rates
with the other local newspapers.
JUDGE TINLEY: And authorize me to sign the contract
with K.D.T.?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and second. Any
question or discussion?
_-iz-o~
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. EMERSON: Just one question, Judge. We ran that
ad right before New Year's on the DWI ad for the County
Attorney's office.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MR. EMERSON: And I think Mr. Shay told me that we
received the charitable organization rate on behalf of the
County. So, I don't know if these rates reflect that or not,
'cause he told me that was the lowest rate that the newspaper
granted.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think there's a separate
category for public notices.
JUDGE TINLEY: Legal notices that we publish for --
for classifieds for employees, for public notices, for
subdivisions, things of that nature. But I want to check on
it. Have you already had some discussion with them, Ms. Hyde?
MS. HYDE: Yeah. The other thing that we did is
we're using all personnel ads, flat ads, year ads, they're all
under the same thing, so we've gotten a better rate, I think,
than what they're quoting, because we get it as a nonprofit
organization. So -- and it is the 100 inch, plus we get the
banner, you know, the outside banner that kind of brings it to
people's attention.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: By consolidating all of
those various ad categories --
MS. HYDE: We've just been putting them all in the
-iz-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
106
same thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're still -- we're not
eligible to get into the 250 bracket? Doesn't look that way?
Okay.
MS. HYDE: I don't think so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioners, if it's acceptable,
rather than take action, let's take a closer look at this
thing. We may be better off sitting where we are, doing
nothing, and not committing ourselves to anything.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Before we come back and take any
formal action. Is that acceptable?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll withdraw my motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. All right, let's move to Item
23, if we might. Consider, discuss and take appropriate
action on the 2006 racial profiling report from David J.
Billeiter, Constable in Precinct 1. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. You see in your
backup the numbers that he has provided. And I understand the
law says that he shall provide the actual tickets, which we
have here, and y'all are welcome to go through these. I had a
great time over the weekend going through each one of them.
Not really. But this is the annual racial profiling report
from Constable, Precinct 1, and I move that we accept them.
JUDGE TINLEY: Accept his report?
-iz-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
107
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Very well.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second to
accept the racial profiling report from David Billeiter,
Constable, Precinct 1. 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: That motion does carry. Let's go to
Item 24; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on the
letter from the Texas Department of Transportation regarding
Cade Loop. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I met with TexDOT about a --
it's been about a month ago now, at Cade Loop, and talked
about redoing the bridge, building a new bridge, whatever they
would recommend. And at that time, they told us when they
widen Highway 39, that they would -- Leonard was with me --
that they would do the bridge. It was a projected cost of
700,000, which they said we would be responsible for half of
it. And so this letter is being sent to us to basically say
that we're going -- that we'd be willing to do that project.
Since that time, the Judge and I have met with them one other
_-i2-o~
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
108
time, and they came up with an even better deal. They now
said that they will pay 100 percent of the cost of Cade Loop
and allow us to allocate 350 thousand to go to other bridges
off-system that need to be redone and upgraded. We do not
I don't --
blessing. We're going to have to -- the way it works is, we
have to basically approve allocating the funds for this
project, and also bless it, sign it. All of us need to sign
it; then we have to send a copy of that to our State
Representative, Harvey Hilderbran, for him to sign a letter
supporting it so that the project can go forward.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that be a one-year
allocation or a two-year allocation?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It would be over a -- I would
say two budget years, because this project on Cade Loop Bridge
at 39 is going to be -- I think the projection is in the fall
of 2008, so we'll have basically two budgets. We'll have this
upcoming budget, and the 1st of October of '07, then we'll
have another budget year that we can -- we can gather some
funds. Mr. Odom has -- has agreed to allocate a certain
amount of funds out of his Special Projects money for next
year; I think he said $100,000 of it. We have approximately
70,000 available in Schreiner Road Trust above what we're
supposed to keep as a minimum, and I really think we should
z-iz-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
109
support this. They -- TexDOT has come up with some
recommendations of other bridges that need repair or
replacement in three out of the four precincts; I think two in
mine, two in Letz', and one in Commissioner -- no, two in
Williams' and one in Letz', I believe.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which were they? Do you
I remember?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I do not remember. They
showed us the list. Do you have them, Len?
MR. ODOM: Well, just -- I didn't bring them, but
off the top of my head, it was the two at Lazy Valley, Ehlers,
Then yours was out at the Y.M.C.A. Then we had one at Center
Point Crossing there by the dam that was also --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Government Crossing?
MR. ODOM: No. No, Government Crossing is -- is
also in there, but there's different funding for off-site
bridges.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: And their budget as to Government
Crossing is a different fund which is going to be funded.
They told me it would upgrade that elevation, I think,
straight across. Sort of like the one --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're talking about
underneath the dam -- the road underneath the dam now?
MR. ODOM: That's right, sir. But there won't be
z-iz-o~
110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
much there other than just widening that, talking to them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: We have -- my understanding, 'cause I
went out with the young lady from District 15 and Mike Coward
last week, and we drove and looked, and what will happen is
that I'll get back with the Commissioners, Mike and I will,
individually, and we'll go out and look and talk and try to
establish priorities. So, the funding -- if everything went
down right now, would be a year, and I have three years after
that and can extend that another two years, so there's five --
there's time in here to do this. And the good thing is, is
that we have that time to allocate six more bridges to upgrade
and do without costing us anything for Cade Loop. It's a
win-win situation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, yeah.
MR. ODOM: And so I believe that I can handle that
over the next couple of years and be able to -- to put that
forward. But it's the same type of process we're doing with
Buster, that -- that we've done on Town Creek right there, so
I don't see why we can't work -- they said that they may be
able to group them in threes so we'll get a better price. And
if we don't spend 350,000, that's great. If they -- our
allocation is over 350,000, we don't pay any more than
350,000, so it really sounds like a very, very good deal. For
350, we leverage a lot of money.
iz-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
111
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Super deal. Some of these
bridges were way off in the horizon to ever get funded.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If -- because, I mean, funding
will be an addition in the county, if individuals outside of
Kerr County government want to help fund this, can they? Can
they do it? Like, if a --
MR. ODOM: There's nothing in the statute that says
that they can't.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know in Bandera County, but if
somebody wants to --
MR. EMERSON: I don't know why they couldn't.
Statutes and the Attorney General opinions allow for donations
and gifts.
MR. ODOM: That's right. It's up to the
Commissioner at that point to then present it to the Court.
So, we will be looking at right-of-way, so there may be some
things that we may be able to get. Some of it, maybe not; I
don't know. That will be a process when they look at it, and
they're going to put some numbers together, Mike said, and the
young lady's going to be looking at numbers for rehab, but on
new construction, Mike's going to put some numbers together.
And we'll have a better idea, I think, in the following weeks,
which I'll be getting in touch with each Commissioner involved
in it.
-iz-o~
112
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's required of us today?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think we have to -- to agree
to fund $350,000 down the road to -- towards these projects,
these other projects, so that we can get the one project done,
and in conjunction with Highway 39 or widening it. And we do
-- and they did tell us that we -- in order to do that, the
Court -- I think the Court should bless it, number one, and
number two, he said that he needed the State Representative to
bless it as well.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need to -- a letter drafted
doing this.
MR. ODOM: I think this agenda item, there will be a
resolution, is my understanding, that'll come from the young
lady down there in San Antonio. And she'll present that to
the Judge and to the Court, and probably have an agenda item
that will brief you on what -- what they're going to do, is
the way I got it. But I think that they would like a movement
of the Court -- a commitment of the Court, and I think this is
what you need to do now. So, to say that you are -- it's on
record that you're going forward, and that a resolution will
be sent forthwith.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So we just need a court order
today.
JUDGE TINLEY: What you're asking for, then,
Commissioner, is a commitment from this Court to approve the
z-iz-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
113
expenditure of $350,000 for future off-site bridge upgrades in
accordance --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Off-system.
JUDGE TINLEY: Off-system bridges in accordance with
TexDOT guidelines for the expenditure of those funds, similar
to what we did on Town Creek road project?
MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that your motion?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll make a motion to that
effect, just what you stated.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any
question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to make a point.
Bruce had mentioned the Special Projects moneys, and if my
memory serves me, there -- that comes from the $10 license
plate fee, and I understand that there is a bill before the
House right now that would allow -- allows counties -- and I'm
not promoting this; I'm just telling you what's there -- that
allows counties to go from $10 to $15 now.
JUDGE TINLEY: $20.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: $20.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, is it $20? Okay.
z-i2-o~
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
119
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $20.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just wanted to bring that
to the table. Might be something to watch for. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments on
the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to
Item 25; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
amend the interlocal agreement between Kerr Emergency 911
Network and Kerr County. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. As Mr. Amerine
makes his way forward, I wanted to point out -- if you look at
the interlocal service agreement, I highlighted the areas that
are going to be changed. Now, is that not cute?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You did it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I -- no, I did not;
Mr. Amerine did. And he said that's not very -- "cute" is not
a very manly word, but I just think that it's so cute how he's
pulled that out and blocked it out so we could see it and
stand it out by itself. And there -- there's three of them in
there, in the document, three changes, and they all three make
pretty much -- pretty good sense.
z-iz-o~
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
115
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would you call this
amendments for dummies? Is that what you're saying?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we're thinking about
doing a book. We're going to have a book on sale here pretty
~ soon.
MR. AMERINE: Actually, you should thank Bill Gates;
that's a Microsoft Word invention. So --
JUDGE TINLEY: I think it's a whole lot more
informative than red-lining, than that process.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, it is.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's -- I go nuts trying to read a
red-lined document.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is good. This is neat.
MR. AMERINE: The fundamental reason behind the
agreement amendment, when we proposed the interlocal back in
2005, we weren't sure what kind of staffing or overhead we
were going to have to maintain the rural addressing system on
I behalf of the County. 2006 has proved that overhead --
there's minimal impact to our overhead and the cost to
citizens, so the need to consider this interlocal from our
perspective every year, to renew it and bring it before the
Court is unnecessary. Also, we don't think we need to
consider compensation as an issue. That's why we pulled out
any reference to that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the County Attorney and I
z-iz-o~
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
116
have chatted about this and looked at it several times through
the months, and do you have any comments about it, Rex?
MR. EMERSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item, as indicated. Any further question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Amerine, before you get
away, I just have one quick question.
MR. AMERINE: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Related, but not on the
agenda. Any word from whatever source about the forthcoming
joint dispatch task force?
MR. AMERINE: Interesting you bring that up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'll talk about that in a
little while.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll talk about that in a
little while, Mr. Amerine. Thank you.
MR. AMERINE: Okay. I'll just say that I'm prepared
<-iz-o~
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
117
to participate whenever the momentum gets started.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 26; consider,
Kerr County resulting from late payment of payroll taxes to
I.R.S. due for quarter ending June 30, 2006. I placed this on
the agenda, and after doing so, I asked the County Attorney
to -- to make contact with the Treasurer or her representative
to permit a -- see if she wanted an opportunity to handle this
in the same manner that was handled on the late payment for
the retirement contributions, before proceeding forward on
this. Where are we on that? I apologize. I just dropped
that in his lap, I think, the latter part of last -- latter
part of last week, as I recall.
MR. EMERSON: I talked to Fred Henneke, who's been
acting as her attorney over a period of time, and relayed the
message to him. It's my understanding that he did talk to
Barbara, and he relayed the message back basically to proceed
against the bond; that's that what it was for. She was not
interested in personally writing a check to cover it at this
time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have that in -- in some sort of
z-iz-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
118
MR. EMERSON: No, sir. We -- we have a verbal from
Fred to myself.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'd really prefer to have that in
some sort of documented format before we proceed, so I would
propose to proceed -- to pass this item until such time as we
get that, or we know we're not going to get it. And would you
-- would you continue to inquire about some written
documentation from either the representative or her?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, before you -- before
you leave this, would you --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- would you be kind enough
to explain to me how you would take action against a former
official that's no longer -- no longer employed or seated or
-- I mean, how -- against their bond? How would -- I really
don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: The --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know how you take
action against a bond, even when they are seated.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you file a claim on the bond,
just like an insurance claim. And this particular -- this
particular bond is what they call an occurrence bond, just
like have you occurrence insurance contracts or claims made
-iz-a~
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
119
contracts. And if it arises out of an incident that occurred
during the term of office and during the term which the bond
was in force, then you have a -- you can assert a claim. Now,
whether or not it's a covered claim, that's an issue to get
sorted out. But the coverage was in place, and continues to
be in place, for things that occurred during the time that the
bond was in force and during the time that she was in office.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As long -- as long as the
issue occurred while that person was in office.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Two years down the road, if
something was to be uncovered or found, then you could go back
against the bond at that time?
JUDGE TINLEY: Conceivably, yes, mm-hmm.
', COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's very interesting.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And just this issue here --
what was it, 1,200?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 12,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, there was some tax in there, so
it's something less than 12,000.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 12,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's 11,000-plus.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the bond was how much?
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the bond that was in force in
_-iz-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
120
2006 was 15,000.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. So it would be -- you
could -- you could apply it up to 15,000?
JUDGE TINLEY: As against the bonding company, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If it were over 15,000, I
mean, they're just going to pay the 15?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. That's the limit of their
liability, yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anybody else have anything
further on that? Okay.
MS. ARELLANO: I have a question, Judge. May I
address --
JUDGE TINLEY: On this item?
MS. ARELLANO: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, ma'am. If you'll come forward;
give us your name and address.
MS. ARELLANO: My name is Linda Arellano, and I
reside at 122 West Lane here in Kerrville. It's my
understanding that this -- the process of exhaustment on
the -- what am I trying to say? That none of the particular
-- you have not exhausted all your particular items as far as
going against the appeals process; is that correct?
JUDGE TINLEY: There was an appeal made, and -- and
it was denied --
z-i-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
121
MS. ARELLANO: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- by the I.R.S.
MS. ARELLANO: Yes, but it hasn't been exhausted. I
mean, you still can go back and appeal the determination. I
mean, there are still some more appeals process in place?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think what's she's asking is
that -- yes, I think -- I believe there are -- there is a
second appeal that we can make, and I think we were in the
process of making that appeal.
MS. ARELLANO: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I -- I wrote a memo to the Treasurer
sometime after we got the determination; I believe it was
dated January 1st that it was denied. Asked her what, if
anything, she intended to do about this going forward, but
never heard, so I had assumed that, hearing nothing, that she
was not going to take any further action on it. So, at that
point in time, we've paid the -- we've paid the money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think -- I think the point
is, I mean, I don't -- I think -- I knew that we -- it was
discussed, appealing it. I think we should appeal it again.
But I still think you -- if it's appropriate, you file on the
bond at the same time. I mean, I think, as I understand it
from prior conversations, you apply on the bond, put the
bonding company on notice, essentially. And they're going
to -- they'll, you know --
_-iz-o~
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: They may -- they may decide to take
up the fight with I.R.S. to get it reversed. That`s certainly
their option to do so as one -- one of their options, I would
MS. ARELLANO: Right. I would think it wouldn't
exclude the statute of limitations as far as claiming, you
know, for the -- toward the bond. The bond. But I don't
think that you want to go toward a bond if you haven't had an
appeals process and you haven't exhausted it. That's my
point. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Anything further on that
particular agenda item? Let's move to Item 27; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to set public hearing to
abandon, discontinue, and vacate Louise Eh1er Road as a
County-maintained road. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's a letter in the packet
from Chris Wallendorf, who represents Dr. Delmer, and
Dr. Delmer actually is in the audience today. This is a --
it's kind of been a long process to try to do this. In the
early 90's, when Lane Valley Bridge was built, the County made
a deal with Dr. Delmer to reroute Lane Valley traffic out
around through a little bridge called Ehler Bridge Road. And
when that was done, they had to build a road through his
property, and in process of doing that, we also changed the
access to a bunch of other -- four other -- three or four
_-iz-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
other properties. It was never the intent for that road to
become a county road, but somehow, from the early 90's, the
County just started maintaining it, and we've been maintaining
it ever since this was done. And Dr. Delmer came to me a
while back, through his attorney, and asked -- actually, I've
talked to him as well -- that his desire is to the original --
to follow the original deal. This road was never intended to
be a county road; he doesn't want it to be a county road.
They have since, through his attorneys -- or his attorney,
Mr. Wallendorf, corrected all of the access easements that
were also changed at the time, and now I think we're at the
point that we can put it on the agenda, set a public hearing.
I'll make a motion that we do that. And I don't have a
calendar in front of me -- yes, I do have a calendar in front
of me. The date of that public hearing would be March 12th
at 10 a.m. Rex, is the notice requirement -- it's 30 days in
the paper, correct?
MR. EMERSON: I believe so.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, make it March 26th at
10 a.m.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that motion.
Commissioner Letz, I got a question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion and a second. Question or
discussion?
z iz 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
124
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Also in Mr. Wallendorf's
letter is a request to rename that part of the road. Do you
want to take that --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That'll be a -- once it's a
private road, it's a much easier process, and it will be
handled next time we do our road name changes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Very good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Otherwise you have to do a
public hearing on name changes, too.
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. Let's move to
Item 28; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
approve a resolution supporting proposed legislation to remove
the expiration date, Special Condition Number 5E, from Permit
Number 5394A, and authorize forwarding the same to appropriate
legislators. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought we weren't going to go
as quickly as we were, and the chair from U.G.R.A. was here
present, Curg Starkey, and I told him to come back at 1:30;
that we could deal with this. We can either deal with it now
or postpone it to 1:30.
-iz-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
125
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we need him here, do you think?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He was here just from a courtesy
standpoint, and expressed interest from U.G.R.A. I don't
think -- I mean, to me, it's a pretty simple thing. The
resolution explains it, but in a nutshell, there is a
condition on that permit that U.G.R.A. has a few thousand
acre-feet that sunsets that permit in 2010 -- 2010. And
Representative Hilderbran has introduced legislation, as has
Senator Fraser, to eliminate that special condition off that
permit. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does it put another date on
it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No date. This is the only
permit, to my knowledge, in the state that has a date on it.
And that's, you know, the basis for it. It's going to go
through as a local bill.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's do it before we change
I our minds.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did I make a motion? I'll make
a motion that we approve the resolution as submitted.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill got the second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any question or discussion on the
z-iz-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
126
motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to
approve and forward letter with questions concerning
Commissioners 2 and
3, y'all decide who's going to lead off.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, this is kind of a
collaboration effort. The letter signifies the thoughts of at
least some of us with respect to the recent forum which we
discussed groundwater availability modeling, and it expresses
some of our concerns with respect to questions that were never
given an opportunity to be -- to be asked, much less answered.
So, with that said, I'll turn it over to Commissioner Letz.
COMMISSIONER LETZ:
Ms. Summerlin, and that the format of that workshop was not
what we were told it was going to be. You know, that is the
heart of the issue. I think they should do what they stated
they're going to do. The other part of it really goes into
_-i?-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
127
the groundwater modeling. I think it's really important that,
one, this Court has an opportunity to get the questions
answered that we have, 'cause we are the body responsible for
-- for water availability requirements as it relates to lot
sizes. I want it real clear to Headwaters that we're glad
they're doing the modeling; we think it's very beneficial to
the county. However, this model has to basically have peer
review. We suggested, and it was also recommended or offered
at that meeting that -- to have the Water Development Board
look at it. I think that if the citizens of Kerr County are
asking us to look at and use a model to set lot sizes, we
better be darn sure it's accurate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's bottom line, what my
intent of the letter is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If anybody has any
suggestions for language changes in either the body of the
letter or the list of questions or things you want to add to
or take away, well, now's the time to do it, 'cause it's on my
computer screen and it's easily checked.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You may want to add some cuss
words in there. (Laughter.) I'll be happy to help with you
that part.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're welcome.
z-iz-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
128
JUDGE TINLEY: A man of great experience such as you
have, I think that would be appropriate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm here to help.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it's to the point, and
I think it needs to be sent.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the letter
with the list of questions to be forwarded to each member of
the Board of Directors of Headwaters Groundwater Conservation
District.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item as indicated. Any question or discussion
on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. In your letter, do
you request a time frame to receive back --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, we did not. If you
think that's appropriate, we can include it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I don't -- I don't
know. You know, usually when you're dealing with another
agency like that, you do. Otherwise, it may be 2040. I mean,
if it were me doing it and I was king, I would ask them for a
month.
COMMISSIONER LETZ
to answering our questions?
So, you mean -- you're speaking
z-iz 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
129
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. Whatever you're
asking them to do, they need to have a -- you need to have a
turn-around time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good point. I'm
trying to figure out what -- the best way to put it into the
letter. How about if you say, oh, one or two months? What do
you think? Is that appropriate?
JUDGE TINLEY: Considering the list of questions,
probably -- I'd say probably at least 60 days.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we're going to do that,
we can do it in the top paragraph on the second page. We'll
talk about the list of questions, that Commissioners Court
would welcome the opportunity to meet with Mr. Wilson and
discuss these and other questions. We can do it right there,
and insert a time frame to meet with Mr. Wilson and members of
the board within the next 60 days, or something to that
effect.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good.
JUDGE TINLEY: And receive answers to these
questions within the next 60 days.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, we'll modify that to
include a time period to meet with Mr. Wilson and the board.
Would that be your -- would that be your sense?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd say the board. They should
be there as well.
z-1%-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
130
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Within the next 60 days,
okay. We'll modify it, have it ready for signature after
lunch. It's intended that everybody sign it, all members of
the Court. I would assume that the Kerrville Daily Times
would probably like to have a copy of it as well.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And West Kerr Current.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: West Kerr Current would
probably like to have a copy.
JUDGE TINLEY: Community Journal here present also.
Appreciate their interest.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A copy of it to anybody else
who wants a copy of it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I got a couple of neighbors
that are interested in this. The next 60 days, when does that
begin?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Date of the letter.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Date from today, 60 days
from today. It's dated today, the letter is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think in that regard, I
think it's good to put the date in there, 'cause it does show
some urgency in it, but I would be very surprised if we get a
response.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Me too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I also think that having
that date in there gives some board members the opportunity to
z-iz-o~
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
say, "Hey, what are we going to do with this?"
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll have it modified and
ready for signatures after lunch.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any question -- or any other
questions or comments? A11 in favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 30; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
ratify and confirm County Judge's approval of County Treasurer
Mindy L. Williams' bond. I swore in Ms. Williams last week
after her bond was received. I'm asking for the Court to
approve my action and approval of that bond.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the agenda item. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much was that bond?
JUDGE TINLEY: $80,000, as prescribed by the Court's
action that we took prior to this budget year, when we looked
at the bond of all elected officials and other courthouse
employees.
_-iz-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
132
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
THE CLERK: We have a motion and second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any further 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. Let's move to
Item 35, if we might; consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action on proposed resolution supporting design and
engineering plans for proposed new or replacement U.S.D.A.
laboratory facility in Kerr County. I put this on the agenda
in collaboration with Commissioner Williams and -- and Guy
Overby, KEDF president. This is in connection with the
proposed new U.S.D.A. facility. We had earlier passed a
resolution and forwarded it to our elected officials in
Washington. We have obtained that feasibility study. That's
complete. We're now before the Congress on appropriation for
design and engineering phase, and we're real hopeful that'll
go forward as step two in that process.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Copies weren't put in the
book, I take it, Judge? Apparently not. Everybody's looking
blank. But I will -- I'll read the Resolved, which is the
important part. That Kerr County Commissioners Court
z-iz-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
133
respectfully request the United States Congress to provide
sufficient funding in the '08 budget to implement the design
and engineering phase of a new U.S.D.A. agriculture research
lab in Kerr County, Texas; and be it further resolved that
copies of the resolution be forwarded to the Honorable Lamar
Smith and the Honorable Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John
Cornyn urging their support for the project.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me go get the original
resolution.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Got more than I intended to get here,
I but --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I apologize, gentlemen, for
leaving this in the box. I think there are three copies for
signature.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll send an original to
~ each.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you want a copy, Buster?
JUDGE TINLEY: They'll all be transmitted
electronically, if approved. Do we have a motion?
THE CLERK: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we sign all three of
these?
z-iz-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
134
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval of the resolution.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval
of the resolution. 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: That motion does carry. The other
items that we have before us are potential executive session
items, 31, 32, 33, and 34. I'd be willing to open up any one
of those if there's any preliminary matters to be discussed in
open or -- or public session. Otherwise, what I'm going to
try and do is go to Section IV of the agenda and get that one
out of the way. Let's move to Section IV. If somebody will
rattle up the Auditor, we'll get moving there. In the
meantime, we'll sign these resolutions.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's move to Section IV of the
agenda, if we could, please. Payment of the bills and related
items. Any member of the Court have any questions with regard
to the bills?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: One thing I noted in part of
the bills, one section was Court-Appointed Attorneys.
z-i2-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
135
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It seems that we have some
attorneys that are getting paid an awful lot more than others,
and it's probably on a case-by-case basis.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But that, to me, kind of stood
out. I noticed that a lot of them are getting $200 or $300
for things; all of a sudden we have others getting $2,000,
$2,500 for their court appointments. And I also noticed
there's civil behind some of those, and not criminal. I
didn't know we appointed attorneys for civil.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think I can answer your question on
the civil, Commissioner. The -- the individual cases are
going to -- the attorneys who handle these cases, of course,
submit records of -- of their time and expense in connection
with each case. I also had made the observation that it seems
like that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three copies, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- there are some lawyers that seem
to spend a whole lot more time on their cases than others. I
assume that's what they're doing. The civil cases are dealing
with the C.P.S., the Child Protective Services cases, the
parental terminations and so forth that got dropped on us here
a few years ago, that they -- used to be we only had to put
those attorneys in place if there was actual termination. Now
z-iz-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
136
that's been expanded. If the responding parent is indigent,
which most of them are, then we're required to provide
those -- those attorneys, so that's where the civil end of it
is coming from, probably.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm glad you explained that,
I because I --
MR. EMERSON: If I can add one more comment, you
also have civil expenses incurred in Judge Maulden's Attorney
General court, when they proceed to hold somebody in contempt
for child support.
JUDGE TINLEY: Because of the possible --
MR. EMERSON: At that point, they appoint an
attorney.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: The only other observation I'd make
about attorneys is, I note that out of the 216th court, there
was a series of cases all involving, apparently, the same
defendant, and that lawyer's in Boerne, and I don't think this
is a capital case. I know we've got a lawyer in Boerne
handling a capital case, but the aggregate total on this one
-- one presentation is $14,500. That kind of jumped off the
page at me. What -- what's that all about, Mr. Tomlinson?
MR. TOMLINSON: Which one?
JUDGE TINLEY: Page 11, Ferguson and Hix. We got
iz o~
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
137
four cases involving the same -- I guess it's the same
individual. Either that, or it's his daddy or his son.
MR. TOMLINSON: I don't have the bills in here. I'd
have to go look.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Do you want me to go look?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments on
I the bills?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do have a question.
Software Group and our new computer program. We're -- we have
paid for the training, and we have been through the training
cycle once or twice, maybe. And anytime -- for some reason,
we didn't get it the first couple of times and we need more
training. Do we -- do they come down and then charge us for
that training?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And that happens
occasionally?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah. It's happened, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And the same thing
with the maintenance of the program, software maintenance?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's a quarterly bill that --
that's the same each quarter.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we -- and we break it out
to -- to departments?
-l,-o~
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
138
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I guess that's all.
Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments?
Page 32. This shows Constable, Precinct 3, but it shows
payable to Joel Ayala, Jr. Is that just a misprint here, or
are we talking about 2?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, has to be.
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
MR. TOMLINSON: It has to be.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And, apparently, that's for
reimbursement for --
MR. TOMLINSON: For --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- how many months?
MR. TOMLINSON: It's 10 through 1.
JUDGE TINLEY: So that's three months.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Four months. 10, 11, 12,
and 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, that's four months.
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, through January?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. It wasn't clear there.
It showed 10/06-1.
MR. TOMLINSON: That's as far as we can go.
z-iz-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
139
JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, okay. Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: On that field.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, it would be about 50
bucks a month, and is that about an average cell phone bill?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably what he's -- because
it's a round number, I would suspect he's billing us $50 a
month.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where are we on -- we had talked
about -- nevermind, I guess we can't. Not on the agenda.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hyde was reading your mind, and I
was reading your mind, and we know exactly where that's going,
and she's working on it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All
in favor of the motion -- do we have a motion?
THE CLERK: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Any
further 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.)
-iz-o~
140
1
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: Motion carries. Budget amendments.
Budget Amendment Request Number 1.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 1 is for the 216th District
Court. It's an amendment to transfer $567 from
Court-Appointed Attorney line item to Court-Appointed
Services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. Any more budget
amendments?
MR. TOMLINSON: I just have a note here to ask about
the budget amendment for the study for the Flat Rock Lake Dam.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hold up on it. We may be
looking for a few bucks more. We're going to come back ir. two
weeks.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLiAM5: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's all the budget amendments?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
-iz-a~
141
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: Do we have any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: I have one to Dr. Antonio Puente for
$300, for -- it's an expert witness fee on the Hernandez case.
JUDGE TINLEY: And how much? $300?
MR. TOMLINSON: $300.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and second to pay a
late bills to Dr. Antonio Puente in the amount of $300. Any
question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And where does that come
i from?
JUDGE TINLEY: Court-Appointed Services.
MR. TOMLINSON: From the 216th Court for
Court-Appointed Attorneys -- I mean -- I mean Court-Appointed
Services, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that the one we just --
MR. TOMLINSON: That's part of the amendment we just
did.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. Okay.
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.)
z-ia-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
142
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Any more
late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have before me monthly reports from
the County Clerk, general and trust funds, and also Justice of
the Peace, Precinct Number 9. Do I hear a motion that those
reports be approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Why don't we
break for lunch and come back at 1:30.
(Recess taken from 12:03 p.m. to 1:36 p.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order on to
our Commissioners Court meeting. Why don't we go back to Item
29 with regard to the letter that was approved for forwarding
to Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District Board of
Directors. I think there's been some changes made. And,
Commissioner Williams, do you want to bring us up to speed on
z-iz-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
143
that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, Judge. Thank you.
There are two changes; the one that's in front of you, and
plus another one the Judge and I talked about to make it even
stronger. On the second page, at that paragraph that begins,
"Attached hereto is a list of some questions that were raised
at a recent workshop. Commissioners would welcome the
opportunity to meet with Mr. Wilson and the Board of Directors
within the next 60 days to receive answers to these and other
questions."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There you go.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I like that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And that strengthens it even
a little bit more. On Page 1, I put "hand-delivered." We
will hand-deliver them this afternoon. So, if this is
approved, there's one for everyone's signature.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll give it to Jody and she
can prepare the package -- packages.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I'm sorry, okay. And that
brings us to our executive session items. I don't know what
the Court's pleasure is about what order they want to handle
these. We'll start with Item 31. At this time, we will go
out of public or open session.
_-iz-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
144
(The open session was closed at 1:41 p.m., and an
executive session was held, the transcript of which
is contained in a separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We will go back into open or
public session at -- at 3:48. Does any member of the Court
have anything to offer with regard to any the matters
discussed in executive session?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like -- I'd make a motion if
I knew how to say it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Subrogation.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's where the thought was that we
would agree to waive subrogation benefits or subrogation
rights which we may have on the health benefits payments claim
in connection with the employee who was involved in an
accident, to the extent it does not exceed $2,500?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. That's my motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. I second that
motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second. Is
there any further discussion on the motion? All in favor of
the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Anything
z-iz-o~
145
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
else to be offered on anything considered in executive
session? We are down at the end of the -- end of the agenda.
Any reports from Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a meeting next week
with the honorable Raymond Holloway. It will be our first
meeting on EMS for the upcoming budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: This is kind of the six-month deal
that we talked about?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kind of, yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I guess not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is just from a
tomographer's office, FYI. It talks about growth in the area,
Kerr County. Only other quickie was our application for
funding for Phase IV of the Kerrville South project received
favorable review from the Economic Development Environmental
Review Committee, and it moves on in the conduit.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Been dealing with lots of water
issues, and I know Commissioner Baldwin will be, you know,
sad, but I'm not going to go over them today.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Dang.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- but one of the things
that I -- well, while doing that, I was in Austin and met with
z-iz-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
146
Senator Fraser, and he seems very inclined to get feedback
from us on bills that are going before the Legislature. And
Linda Uecker keeps up with lots of them, probably better than
any one person, so I've talked to Linda a little bit. We may
put that on a future agenda to start looking at these so we
Fraser, certainly, and I know Harvey would as well, would like
input from us on some of these that impact counties. That's
it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The biggest thing on my plate
ral of them, actually. One is the Animal Control.
Eva and I went out the other day and met with a gentelman for
about two hours. We're trying to put together some procedures
and get some training, and would like to have some things get
accomplished out there, like painting and maintenance and some
other issues. I have a list of things on that that I'm going
to work with the appropriate people on, as well as -- the
other thing is, I met with Mel Ferguson from Senator Fraser's
office last Tuesday and took him on a tour of the Highway 39
and 1340 bridge projects proposed by TexDOT. He now thinks
that -- and knows, pretty sure, that that's the prettiest area
that he represents; that he understands the concern of the
citizens about the projects. He's also said he would be
really good to help us in other situations if we need him. I
z iz-o~
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
147
spent three hours with him the other day riding him around.
That's all I have for right now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I do have one other
issue that I want to bring up. Doesn't have anything to do
with assignments, I don't think, but I want to bring up this
issue of combined dispatch. We somehow -- I don't know who
started it, but we all decided that we wanted to have -- sit
down and have a visit about combined dispatch, and we put
together a plan and sent it to the City. And the Police Chief
decided it wasn't cool, so they sent it back, and we sent it
back over there. Now they've accepted it, I understand.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it's just sitting there, I
think. I really think that this Court needs to take a
proactive stance in this thing. We need to appoint our
committee members and send it over there, and let's get this
thing rocking and rolling. 'Cause we're easing toward the
budget process, and that's an important issue. I don't know
that we're going to -- I just think some of it needs to be
done before the budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: Probably needs to be done by -- on an
agenda item, wouldn't you think?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, absolutely. No question
of it. I'm just saying that we need to start thinking in that
-iz-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
148
way. And we want to be the ones that drive it, not somebody
else.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, Jody's going to have to start
working early on the agenda, because she's going to be doing
some training week after next, and so let's get that on the
next agenda.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's get that moving. Anything
else? Quick report on our new Treasurer's office. As I
indicated, we swore in Ms. Williams last Thursday so that she
could get moving down there. She -- my -- I checked with her
most recently this morning. She wanted me to kind of give the
Court a little update. She is further along than she expected
to be at this point. She wanted to be sure that y'all were
aware that she is there in large measure because Joy and Nona
from the Auditor's office came in over the weekend and worked
with her on Saturday. They worked up until 8 o'clock Saturday
night, and they made a pretty good size dent in things. Mindy
was down here also on Sunday, and she's -- she was making some
more headway then. And she's -- she's further along than she
thought she'd be at this point, but she wanted me to be sure
and pass along that she wouldn't have been there without the
help that she had over the weekend. But she's -- she's
chipping away at it, and she'll continue to do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's very nice of those two
z-iz-a~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
149
ladies to chip in like that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, she checked with the Auditor,
and -- and he agreed to put them in an overtime status, 'cause
he had a little overtime in his budget -- had some money his
budget. So, he's -- he's -- and it's going to help him too,
of course.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: But we're -- we're going the right
direction. Is that it? Anything else? We'll stand
adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 3:55 p.m.)
z iz-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
150
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF KERR ~
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my
capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court
of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place
heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 16th day of
February, 2007.
P Y Y
Certified Shorthand Reporter
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
B Y : _ _F~'/~Yi l ~/
Kathy ~nik, De ut Count Clerk
_-iz-o~
ORDER NO. 3 0126
RESOLUTION FOR SUBMISSION OF VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT
GRANT PROPOSAL FOR 2007-2008
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Resolution for the submission of the Victims of Crime Act
Grant proposal for 2007-2008 to the Office of the Governor, Criminal
Justice Division, to fund the Kerr County Crime Victims' Coordinator
Program for an additional year.
ORDER NO.30127
APPLICATION TO DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR SAFE HAVEN
PROJECT
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioners Williams. The
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve making application to the Department of Justice for Safe Haven
Project and approve the Memorandum of Understanding between Kerr
County and the Hill Country Crisis Council.
ORDER NO. 30128
CHANGE DEPARTMENT NAME OF KERB COUNTY COLLECTIONS
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve changing the name of Kerr County Court Collections to Kerr
County Court Compliance by June 1, 2007.
ORDER NO. 30129
REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOTS 5 & 6 OF SHALAKO ESTATES
ADDITION
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the revision of Plat for Lots 5 & 6 of Shalako Estates Addition, Vol
5, Page 66, located in Precinct 4.
ORDER NO.30130
REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOT 96, KERRVILLE SOUTH II
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the revision of Plat for Lot 96, of Kerrville South, Section II, Vo14,
Page 64, located in Precinct 1, and grant a variance from the 1-acre rule, and
that the concept be approved under the alternate plat process, upon the
recommendation of the Road Administrator, and change the verbiage on the
plat from "replat" to "revision of plat".
ORDER NO. 30131
REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOT 124B & 131A OF FALLING WATER
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, 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 Lots 124B & 131A of Falling Water,
located in Precinct 3.
ORDER NO. 30132
CONCEPT PLAN TO REVISE LOT 14, TIERRA VISTA
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the concept plan to revise Lot 14, Tierra Vista, Vol 4, Page 94,
located in Precinct 1.
ORDER NO. 30133
CONCEPT OF ROCKIN BAR S
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Concept of Rockin Bar S, located in Precinct 4.
ORDER NO. 30134
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF ESTATES AT JOHNSON CREEK
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Preliminary Plat of Estates at Johnson Creek, located in
Precinct 4.
ORDER NO. 30135
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RANCHES ON SUNSET RIDGE
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin/Williams. The
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Preliminary Plat of Ranches on Sunset Ridge, located in
Precinct 3.
ORDER NO.30136
REMOVAL OF LANDSCAPED ENTRY FOR DEERFIELD
SUBDIVISION
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the removal of the landscaped entry for Deerfield Subdivision
located in Precinct 2.
ORDER NO.30137
DECLARE COUNTY PROPERTY SURPLUS
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioners Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve declaring county property as surplus, and authorize disposal of
same through Ebay.
ORDER NO.30138
VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT AND COUNTY SPONSORED
ENTITIES CONTRACTS
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve Contracts as listed below, and authorize County Judge to sign
same:
Turtle Creek Volunteer Fire Department
Comfort Volunteer Fire Department
Tierra Linda Volunteer Fire Department
Elm Pass Volunteer Fire Department
Center Point Volunteer Fire Department
Divide Volunteer Fire Department
Hill Country CASA
K'STAR
Dietert Claim
Big Brothers/Big Sisters
Alamo Regional Transit
ORDER NO. 30139
IMPLEMENTATION OF BiJRN BAN
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Commissioners' right to implement or remove the burn ban in
their Precinct.
ORDER NO. 30140
2006 RACIAL PROFILING REPORT FOR PRECINCT 1
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Accept the 2006 Racial Profiling Report from David J. Billeiter, Constable,
Precinct 1.
ORDER NO. 30141
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION/CADE LOOP LETTER
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the expenditure of $350,000 for future off-system bridge upgrades
in accordance with TXDOT guidelines for the expenditure of those funds,
similar to the Town Creek Road Project.
ORDER NO. 30142
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH KERB EMERGENCY 911
NETWORK
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the amendment to the Interlocal Agreement between Kerr
Emergency 911 Network and Kerr County.
ORDER NO.30143
ABANDON, DISCONTINUE AND VACATE LOUISE EHLER ROAD AS
COUNTY MAINTAINED
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve setting a public hearing for March 26, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. to
abandon, discontinue and vacate Louise Ehler Road as a County maintained
road.
ORDER NO. 30144
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING LEGISLATION TO REMOVE
EXPIRATION DATE FROM PERMIT NO. 5394A
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Resolution supporting proposed legislation to remove the
expiration date, Special Condition No. SE, from Permit No. 5394A, and
authorize forwarding same to the appropriate legislators.
ORDER NO. 30145
GROUNDWATER AVAILABILITY MODELING
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve forwarding the letter, with the list of questions concerning
Groundwater Availability Modeling, to Headwaters Groundwater
Conservation District Board of Directors, and to meet with Mr. Wilson and
the Board of Directors within 60 days to receive answers to these and other
questions.
ORDER NO.30146
RATIFY AND CONFIRM COUNTY TREASURER MINDY L.
WILLIAMS' BOND
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Ratify and confirm the County Judge's approval of the County Treasurer,
Mindy L. Williams', bond.
ORDER NO. 30147
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF NEW OR REPLACEMENT USDA
LABORATORY FACILITY IN KERB COUNTY
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Resolution supporting design and engineering plans for the
proposed new or replacement USDA laboratory facility in Kerr County.
ORDER NO. 30148
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, came to be considered
by the Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and
Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	158,347.44
14-Fire Protection	$	39,396.85
15-Road & Bridge	$	129,137.04
18-County Law Library	$	2,379.58
19-Public Library	$	36,972.25
31-Parks	$	16.98
50-Indigent Health Care	$	47,177.03
76-Juv Detention Facility	$	3,005.15
TOTAL
$ 416,432.32
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner
Williams, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the
claims and accounts.
ORDER NO.30149
BUDGET AMENDMENT # 1
216TH DISTRICT COURT
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to transfer the following expense
codes:
Expense Code Description
10-435-401 Court Appointed Services
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $567.00
10-435-402 Court Appointed Attorney - ($567.00)
ORDER NO. 30150
LATE BILL
216th DISTRICT COURT
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to issue a hand check in the amount
of $300.00 to Dr. Antonio E. Puente, PH.D. for balance due on Expert
Witness Expense A97-364 Hernandez.
ORDER NO. 30151
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 the following monthly reports:
County Clerk -General and Trust Fund
JP #4
ORDER NO. 30152
THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR OF HEALTH BENEFITS
PROGRAM TO WAIVE SUBROGATION RIGHTS ON HEALTH
BENEFITS PAYMENTS CLAIM
Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made
by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Agree to waive subrogation benefits, or subrogation rights, which we may
have on the health benefits claim, in connection with the employee who was
involved in an accident, to the extent it does not exceed $2,500.