1
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
Special Session
Monday, June 25, 2007
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas

v
O
CZS
q
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4
ABSENT: WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
I N D E X
June 25, 2007
--- Commissioners' Comments
i
1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action
concerning Environmental Health review of Kerr
County Revisions of Plat and routing process
1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
request to approve use of Hill Country Youth
Exhibit Center for HILCO annual membership meeting
on Feb. 8, 2008, at same rate as previous year
1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
guidelines for reviewing comprehensive drainage
plans required for multi-unit residential
developments, manufactured housing communities,
business parks, or other similar uses where on-site
sewage disposal is to be used
1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
proposed agreement to house Juveniles from Cameron
County in case of natural disaster
1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
review Kerr County Rainwater Harvesting Program,
Court Order #27352, and discuss process
1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
accept an Amish Country Gazebo as a gift from
Mr. Gene Lehmann in honor of his late wife,
Francis Lehmann
1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
authorize representative(s) of Kerr County
Commissioners Court to engage in discussions with
City of Kerrville elected officials concerning use
of county property adjacent or near Kerr County Law
Enforcement Center by City of Kerrville for City
Police and/or courts and other law enforcement
related uses
i
1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to appoint
Ray Garcia to Kerr County Child Service Board
1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to set up
Budget Workshops in July 2007
PAGE
5
8
21
25
28
31
36
44
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
		I N D E X (Continued)
		June 25, 2007
1.10	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to
	accept resignation of Bruce Baker from Library
	Advisory Board	
1.11	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action on
	proposed updates	and/or measures of courthouse
	security plan	
1.12	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to
	finalize Youth Exhibit Center and Union church
	Reservation and booking policy and procedures
1.13	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to add
	web page link to	Kerr County web site to inform
	employees of non-	official information (fundraisers,
	birthdays, etc.),	to be posted and maintained by
	Kerr County I.T.	Department
1.14	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to
	obtain repayment	from former employee of over-
	payment of wages	(Executive Session)
4.1 Pay Bills
4.2 Budget Amendments
4.3 Late Bills
4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports
5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee
Assignments
3.1 Action as may be required on matters discussed in
Executive Session
--- Adjourned
PAGE
50
51
72
82
90
90
91
99
99
101
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4
On Monday, June 25, 2007, at 9:00 a.m., a special
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the
Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville,
Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the
Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled and posted for this
date, Monday, June the 25th, 2007, at 9 a.m. It's past that
time now. I asked my good friend, Reverend Frankie Enloe, to
be with us this morning to give us a word of prayer before we
begin. If you'd all rise, please?
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. At this time,
if there's any member of the public that wishes to bring any
matter to our attention or to address us on any matter that is
not a listed agenda item, feel free to come forward at this
I time. If you wish to be heard on an agenda item, we'd ask
that you fill out a participation form. There are forms at
the back of the room. It`s not absolutely essential, but it
helps me to be aware that there is someone that wants to speak
on that item, and -- and hopefully not overlook you when we
get to that item. But if you do want to be heard on an agenda
item and you have not filled out a participation form, when we
get to that item, get my attention in some fashion and I'll be
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
5
sure and recognize you so that you can be heard and have your
say with regard to it. But if there's some -- some item that
you want us to be aware of that is not a listed agenda item,
anything on your mind, feel free to come forward at this time
and tell us what's your mind. I don't see anybody coming
forward, so we'll move on with our agenda. Commissioner
Baldwin, what do you have for us this morning?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I don't have a whole
lot on my mind. I wanted to point out my good friend Frankie
Enloe and his service, and say thank you personally to him.
You know, there's lots of folks in this community that serve
others, and that's what makes the thing work. And Frankie's
one of those guys. that has committed most of his life to
serving others, and the rest of it, he's a guitar-picker. But
I guess that's service, too. I see where some local -- local
Tivy kids and the Comfort kid made All-State baseball.
That's -- that's -- the Kerrville kids, one was a junior and
one was a sophomore, so that's kind of interesting. I could
just go on and on, Judge, but we have a big agenda. Thank you
for allowing me to speak this morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: You bet. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I have, I just keep
pinching myself to figure out that it's almost the first of
July, and we're having these 80-degree days and beautiful
weather. I'm just kind of confused, but I hope it continues.
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
6
It's nice. That's it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I was driving coming in
through Ingram this morning, and I looked up on the marquee at
the Bank of the Hills, and there was a big sign saying that
the Kerr County 4-H team -- wool judging team won the national
championship. I thought that was pretty neat. And they're
real active in a lot of ways, but that's another way that they
do things. That's pretty neat, I thought. Second thing is, I
-- I passed this letter out to the media, but we are going to
have a new traffic signal at the intersection of Goat Creek
Cutoff Road and Highway 27. I was asked by Windmill Ridge
Subdivision people to -- they got a petition together and
petitioned, basically, the -- basically, I guess, Kerr County
to -- to initiate the project to TexDOT.
And within 30 days of submitting their -- their
petition, and the Judge and I wrote a letter in support of it
and asked them to do a traffic impact study, we get a letter
back saying that they're going to do it and it's not going to
cost us anything, which was not what we were expecting. We
were expecting to have to pay something. But there's no --
there appears to be no cost to Kerr County in this thing, and
it's a really hazardous area coming onto 27 off Goat Creek
Cutoff, and this should be a big asset. It'll also help the
Greenwood Forest entrance, you know, both going and coming.
So, I'm pretty excited about that, to get something from
6-25-07
1
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
TexDOT once again this year; after many good things, to get
something else from them in such a short amount of time, it's
nearly unbelievable. So, I'm pretty happy with that. That's
it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think we all maybe look at TexDOT
in a -- with a mixed view. We see what's going on out here on
Sidney Baker, and we have to put up with that turmoil and --
and difficulty, and maybe we think ill of TexDOT, but those
folks do excellent work. We've got a number of projects
underway that they're involved in. Our resident engineer,
Mike Coward, does some great work. I sent a memo to -- I
dictated a memo to the members of the Court dealing with how
we're going to handle this -- or propose to handle the
landscaping out here in front on the Sidney Baker side because
of the sidewalks that are put in there. But they've got a lot
of projects going on here locally, and they do a lot of good
for -- for all of our citizens, and those are your tax dollars
at work, and they're doing good work.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I might add on the TexDOT
topic that a lot of the reason I think that we did get a lot
from TexDOT in this county is because I know Road and Bridge,
through us, worked very closely with TexDOT. It's kind of
a -- I do know some of the other counties that surround us,
they don't have as good a relationship between their court --
~I and the City of Kerrville, include them as well -- of working
6-25-07
1
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
with TexDOT, and they don't get the projects and support that
we get in Kerr County. So, I think it's -- you know, it's
kind of a two-way -- TexDOT helps those that help them. And I
think hats off to Road and Bridge, 'cause from our standpoint,
they deal with them more than anybody else, and they've worked
very closely and worked with TexDOT. So, it's kind of worked
both ways.
JUDGE TINLEY: The other programs they've got
underway are to give us the ability to do more with off-site
bridges also, as a result of a project that Commissioner
Oehler's working with them on. With regard to the -- the
local team winning the 4-H wool judging, Roy Walston, our
local Ag Extension agent, engaged me in a discussion here a
week or so ago. He's got the trophy out there at their -- at
their building, and he talked about the possibility of
bringing it down and maybe exhibiting it here somewhere in the
courthouse, where -- where more members of the public can see
it. It's a gorgeous trophy; goes back many, many, many years,
and hopefully we can get that done so that more people can,
number one, be aware of their accomplishments, and number two,
view this trophy that goes back many, many years.
Let's get on with our agenda, if we might. Item
Number 1 is to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
concerning Environmental Health review of Kerr County
revisions of plat and the routing process. Mr. Odom?
6-25-07
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
MR. ODOM: Yes. Good morning, Judge. I want, to
start off, to give kudos to the young people. I think it is
quite an honor that anybody that wins all-state -- makes
all-state is exceptional, and to win a national
championship -- like a national championship, but a national
trophy, the parents should be complimented, because that had
to do with parents pushing and encouraging their children to
exceed and excel, and that's the exception, it seems like,
today. So, my hat's off to the parents of those young people.
And I'm not running for office, either. So -- (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure sounded like it.
MR. ODOM: There's been some discussion as to
whether Environmental Health needs to review and/or sign
revisions of plats when it combines lots. At the last
Commissioners Court, you asked that we place this item on
today's agenda. I'm sure there are issues which the
Environmental Health and the County Attorney would like to
address on this item, but the only issue for Road and Bridge
is the routing process. Since we are not familiar with
O.S.S.F. rules, we don't feel comfortable making the decision
as to whether Environmental Health should review and/or sign
the final plat. Therefore, we ask that the routing slip
continue to go through Environmental Health for review of the
statement for correctness, and for them to determine if they
need to sign the final plat. Attached is a copy of the
6-25-07
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
routing slip currently being used for alternate plat process
to assure all entities and departments have been notified. On
Page 2, you will notice that utility companies sign the
routing slip, even if they do not sign the final plat. We
feel this would be an appropriate way for the Court to see
that Environmental Health received the information they need.
Please let us know what changes you want us to make so that
this process works for the surveyors, Environmental Health,
and us.
Below, you see an example that we have of what we
thought that is similar to what the utility companies do now.
They -- they need to know what changes are there, and I think
Environmental Health needs to do the same thing; i.e., Center
Point school and where the sewer was at. I mean, there are
issues that are -- that I don't -- not familiar with, but that
information needs to be out there. They need to have some
input. But other than that, we just need to know the routing
process. So, I'm open for suggestions, or -- or my comments
may be acceptable; I don't know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the first page, it seems to
me the easiest way to do it is, on the first page under Item
3, which says, "Submit one copy of plat to O.S.S.F.," add
another check box below it that just says, "Permit and fee not
required," and then let them sign there and date it, and we're
done. And we can pass the court order today that says that
6-25-07
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
they are not required to sign it if it's -- if it's combining
lots. To me, that's a --
MR. ODOM: That's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- simple way to figure it.
MR. ODOM: Go ahead.
MR. VOELKEL: Don Voelkel. One thing we talked
about before when we went through this the first of the year
is, when we're moving a lot line to create -- like, if
someone's built a house too close and they have a large enough
tract where they can move a lot line 10 feet, well, the way we
looked at it in January was, as long as you're not creating
any new lots in the configuration you end up with, you're not
having any review to be done by Environmental Health. So, I'd
like -- and Lee and I talked. Lee had a doctor's appointment,
but he was going to be here, but he deputized me. He wanted
-- he and I were talking about maybe adding that language too,
if you're not -- as long as you're not creating any new lots,
moving a lot line a few feet to accommodate some, you know,
fence problem or house problem, and combining lots. 'Cause
those are the two situations we run across a lot.
MR. ODOM: We have -- that has come up before, but
we determined that we weren't creating anything and that they
didn't need to sign that.
MR. VOELKEL: Right. And I'm not saying that they
shouldn't -- Environmental Health shouldn't be aware of that,
6-25-07
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
adjusting a lot line.
JUDGE TINLEY: Don, on adjusting a lot line, if
you've already got one of those lots improved with a septic
facility in place, it occurs to me that they need to review
that to be sure that the line's not being moved too close to
those facilities, and that they might need to be in that
routing process for that purpose, would they not?
MR. VOELKEL: It -- possibly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They need to be -- I don't --
that's why I like this option here. They still get it. They
just -- there's really not a fee or an application. And I
think if it's a minor change -- and that's going to be a
little bit subjective, like if it's a -- if you're on an old
half-acre lot, a minor change can be pretty significant as to
what they can do. So, it's going to be some subjectivity
O.S.S.F. is going to have to look at.
MR. VOELKEL: It may be something that the surveyor
should submit that plan with it saying, "Here's the new lot
line; here's the septic. There's not a problem."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you need to make --
MR. VOELKEL: Make it easy for them to look at it
and say, "Oh, yeah, we don't have a problem." Or if they say,
"Hey, there is a problem, we need to review it," I think that
6-25-07
13
ought to be an option that they could have, instead of, you
1
know, for everything that comes through the thing have to pay
2
3 the fee and do the -- you know, all that review when it may or
q may not be necessary.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have no problem with that. I
5
6 mean, as long as --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think there's a difference,
7
g though, between -- between moving a lot line than there is
g removing. When you remove one, then I'm not sure that the --
10 that O.S.S.F. needs to -- or Environmental Health needs to
11 review it. There'd be no reason for them to review on that
12 one. Now, if you're adjusting a lot line, if you're moving it
13 onto part of another tract and reducing one in size and adding
14 size to the other one, I think that's a -- that's totally
15 different. But as far as taking one completely out, I don't
16 believe that there needs to be a review on that one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they need to go through --
17
18 they need to go down there; otherwise, their records aren't
19 going to be complete.
20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, that's true. Go down
21 and just have a copy.
22 MR. ODOM: Their records would indicate where that
23 septic system is, if they moved it outside the lot or not.
24 And that's been the situation.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What I'm saying is, when you
25
6-25-07
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
2_
take a lot line out and there's an existing structure there,
that's going to even make a better situation than adjusting
the lot line.
MR. ODOM: That's true.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: When you remove it, I see no
need, other than for their records, to see what the lot is now
and what it was before.
MR. ODOM: That's -- you know, development is a
man-made change, and that's an arbitrary line, an imaginary
line that's been removed, and I don't see the change that
would strike -- I'm not a lawyer, so -- but, I mean, I don't
see it striking a man-made change, just moving an imaginary
line.
JUDGE TINLEY: Leonard, is your question as to
whether or not we merely eliminate any fee involved? Or are
you also suggesting maybe it shouldn't even be reviewed, even
for informational purposes, by O.S.S.F.?
MR. ODOM: I say that it should be reviewed, that
the surveyor should take it to them. The fee, I could care
less. That's -- that has nothing to do with me. I don't even
need it on the -- on the routing slip. But I believe that
they should review it, and they should be able to sign. The
-- the question has been, they say that they have to sign
everything. What -- my opinion doesn't make any difference.
It makes a difference with the Court. It sounds like there's
6-25-07
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
2F
unanimity as far as removing the line doesn't make a change.
I mean, that's what we want do; we want to take three lots
into one lot.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That needs to be very easy and
cost very little.
MR. ODOM: Very little. And you've already paid the
fee for one, so I don't know whether you need to -- that's
something you need to do. That's not mine; that's
Environmental Health. But they should review it, because they
-- they have the records on that to see where that system is
at. And we've had that in play, something that Mr. Voelkel
did -- not Don, but Lee -- with Center Point schools, and that
lot line showed that when it was all said and done, it was
outside what they had changed -- or what they created. So,
they need to review it, there's no doubt. But they just need
to sign for my purposes for final plat, or for -- for the
final so that they've had it and they've reviewed it, and they
get with it and resolve the issue with the engineer or the
surveyor.
JUDGE TINLEY: Wouldn't you agree that -- that
O.S.S.F. needs the information, whatever may occur?
MR. ODOM: Whatever may occur.
JUDGE TINLEY: Whether elimination of a lot line,
moving of a lot line, or anything under the alternate process?
MR. ODOM: That's right.
6-25-07
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, it occurs to me that we can
certainly eliminate the fee, but the only way we're going to
know that they got that information is if they continue to
sign off on that plat.
MR. ODOM: Absolutely, just like the utility
companies do. That way I know, for a final, that they've
reviewed it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we amend
the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Whoa, whoa, whoa.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just amending the routing slip.
Let me say this --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to hear -- I want to
give Environmental Health an opportunity to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We`re not voting; I'm just
making a motion. I'm making a motion that we amend the
routing slip to add a box under Section 3 to say, "Permit and
fee not required."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Now, any question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just thought maybe, you
know, in all of our wisdom here, that possibly we would let
6-25-07
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1°
2C
21
2~
2:
2~
2'
the other side tell us what they think. I -- would you like
to say something?
MS. HULETT: Sure, be glad to.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MS. HULETT: I'm Tish Hulett with the Environmental
Health Department, and I like the proposal that we do see all
changes. And we'll review these. If we feel there's
additional information that we need, we can let them know at
that time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And then were we going
to include the language that Mr. Voelkel --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That will be a second motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a separate motion?
All right. And I'm going to ask you to -- we're -- we want to
see something in writing, how the verbiage is really laid out,
before I vote on something like that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All I want to do is the routing
slip. As soon as we vote on this one, I can make a second
motion. I could do them backwards.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, this -- this is fine
right here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're doing good.
~ JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments on
6-25-07
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
21
2~
2;
2~
2.
the existing motion? All in favor of that motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that there
will be no fee or application required whenever a lot line is
removed between two or more lots, or there is a minor revision
to a plat. And the minor revision is subjective, and
determined by Environmental Health Department.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tish, do you like that one? I
heard her swallow a little bit hard when I said that,
"subjective."
JUDGE TINLEY: Any question or discussion on that
motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, is -- are we calling
this a policy change?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tish?
MS. HULETT: As long as there's not additional
6-25-07
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
information needed, I don't -- I don't have a problem with
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's why I think it's
subjective. And just a little bit further, a lot of times --
and I'm thinking of Falling Water as a good example. We've
shifted those lines a couple of feet here and there for who
knows what reason, but we did it a lot, and it really didn't
affect anything. But if you're going to -- if you're on a
3-acre lot and you move it a -- you know, make it -- or a
5-acre lot or 6-acre -- anyway, significant changes of acreage
and boundaries where it may have an impact, then I think it
needs to go through the process.
MR. VOELKEL: And I think when you have -- like,
Falling Water, when we did a bunch of those tweakings, for
whatever reason that they wanted to do them, and there were no
improvements out there at all, that would be easy for us to
submit it with the routing slip to Tish to say, "We're moving
this lot line. There are no improvements on either lot line,
so it's not going to affect any septic." Or the alternative
is, "There's a house over here; the septic tank's on the other
side. We're moving it over because the garage encroached," so
that she knows what we're doing and why, and is able to be
able to make the call, you know, where if we just submit the
plat, she's not going to know anything. So, I think it needs
to be on our end to give her enough information to make that
6-25-07
20
1 call.
2
3 her part.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it's no.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's why it's a subjective call on
MR. VOELKEL: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On her part. If she says no,
MR. VOELKEL: And if she doesn't get much
information from us or anybody, she needs to tell us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That the answer is no.
MR. VOELKEL: What you're doing, why you're doing
it, or else you're going to have to pay 75 bucks.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got another question.
Mr. Voelkel's in the room, but there are other companies out
there that do business with us. How do you -- are you going
to notify them of this change? Or we're just going to wait
till they come through and not do it the way we want to, and
make them go back through again? Or how are we going to do
that? How are we going to notify the other Voelkel-type folks
that there's been a change?
MS. HULETT: We can send them a -- a notice.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're going to do it?
MS. HULETT: I can do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments on
the motion? All in favor of that motion, signify by raising
6-25-07
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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 2; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
request of the Court to approve the use of the Hill Country
Youth Exhibit Center for annual membership meeting on Friday,
February 8, 2008, at the same rate as previous year, that
being $162.50. That's for the HILCO Credit Union, which is
owned by County, City, and State employees in Kerr County.
Ms. Uecker.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Linda, I've got a question
before you take off. Is that a comma after 162?
MS. UECKER: Looks like it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah, it is.
MS. UECKER: Well, I've been on the Board of
Directors of Hill Country Federal Credit Union for the county,
city, and state employees for about 10 years now, and we hold
our annual membership meeting that's required by CUNA, I
think, every year out at the -- at the barn at the Youth
Exhibit Center. And, you know, we're not stuck on the 162.50
or the 16,250. But on behalf of the credit union, I'm asking
the Court to allow us to rent that space on February the 8th
at a reduced rate, as has been done in the past.
6-25-07
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what --
JUDGE TINLEY: Is the facility available on that
MS. DECKER: I think so. I think they've already --
JUDGE TINLEY: Penciled you in?
MS. DECKER: Mm-hmm, penciled us in.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How much is the fee today?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think we really need to
table this until after we -- we're relooking at all this, and
we're not going to lose as much money as we have been losing
out there. And I think it's going to be discussed today some,
but probably really at our next meeting, we're going to have
who's on that list and who isn't to get reduced fees and how
we're going to handle that. And I think, you know, at this
point, I'd just rather -- I mean, I don't mind some sort of
reduced fee, but I'm not sure what the amount's going to be.
MS. DECKER: Okay. What's the regular rate?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: For that building?
MS. DECKER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 350, I think.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What is -- how many people are
going to be at the meeting?
MS. DECKER: Usually about 150.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, you're going to need
tables and chairs and all that stuff set up too?
6-25-07
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. UECKER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What we're looking at, so you
don't have to stay all day, is we're doing a -- everyone's
going to be on an approved list. If the Court approves it,
they'll get a percentage reduction off the standard rate, and
we're trying to figure out right now what it`s actually
costing us out there based on the usage we're getting.
MS. UECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then there will be a discount.
Obviously, 4-H will get free use, continued discounts to
certain agencies. I would think this qualifies. I don't have
a problem with that at all. It's just a matter as to what the
discount is.
MS. UECKER: You think we do qualify? Is that what
you said?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
MS. UECKER: Okay. Yeah, because I just -- you
know, just -- that's fine. I don't have a problem with that.
As long as -- you know, you already know, and I've told you
before that, you know, this credit union is owned by county
employees, as well as city employees and state employees.
That's our field of membership. And -- like I need that. But
at what point do you think you will know what that -- if we
qualify, and when will you make that decision?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably at our first meeting of
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
24
July. At the latest, our second meeting in July.
MS. UECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that right, Bruce?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Uh-huh. That's the way I feel
about it.
MS. UECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When is your meeting?
JUDGE TINLEY: February 8th.
MS. UECKER: February 8th of '08. But we had to go
ahead and schedule it because of, you know, the use of the
facility, and that's our one-year around that period.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- and, like I say, go ahead
and book it through standard booking.
MS. UECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Through Alyce.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on that agenda item,
gentlemen? Let's move to the next item; consider, discuss,
and take appropriate action on guidelines for reviewing
comprehensive drainage plans that are required for multi-unit
residential developments, manufactured housing communities,
business parks, or other similar uses where on-site sewage
disposal is to be used. Subsequent to the agenda being
finalized and published, there was communication from the
Environmental Health Department that they wish that this
matter be withdrawn from consideration today. Is that still
6-25-07
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
your request?
MS. HULETT: Yes,-sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Very well. We'll move on, then, to
Item 4, consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
proposed agreement to house juveniles from Cameron County in
case of natural disaster, with Cameron County furnishing the
personnel. Mr. Emerson?
MR. EMERSON: Gentlemen, basically, I'm filling in
for Kevin Stanton. And it's my understanding that previously,
the County had made the facility available for emergency
hurricane evacuation to the juveniles from Cameron County, and
Cameron County has approached Mr. Stanton about doing that
again, and that's in the backup material that's been presented
to you. I did tell Mr. Stanton when he approached me that
there was an issue with an M.H.M.R. facility out of Houston
that had approached y'all last year about the same thing, and
he did the research, and I believe it's attached, where the
other facility made a presentation. Everybody was in
agreement that that was an option that was available, but the
other facility was going to generate a memorandum of
understanding, and to my knowledge, they have never done so.
I know our office has not received one, and according to
Mr. Stanton, there's not one on file with the clerk's office.
So, there shouldn't be any conflicts.
JUDGE TINLEY: My response -- my suggestion would be
6-25-07
26
1
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 it include, at a minimum, two things. Number one, space
available, and number two, that they provide personnel for the
staffing of -- of their residents that they may put there.
'Cause we're not in a position to, number one, guarantee
space, or number two, we don't have the staffing.
MR. EMERSON: That's my understanding from reading
the material that Mr. Stanton gave me, is that it's subject to
those two requirements.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Need a motion to that effect?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rex, you're comfortable with
this -- doing this kind of thing?
MR. EMERSON: It's -- I don't think the County has
any problem with it. It shouldn't be any cost to the
taxpayers, because it's subject to space availability, like
the Judge said. So, if the facility's leased out, as is
currently being discussed, then we just don't have any open
space. Then that's not an issue. And if the other county
covers all the expenses, utilities, staffing and so forth,
then once again, the County doesn't have any expense.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we did this last year?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think, essentially.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did they use it?
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
MR. EMERSON: No.
6-25-07
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
JUDGE TINLEY: Never became necessary, because of no
hurricanes in the valley.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we have an agreement already
with them? Or we're going to -- we need a motion to get an
agreement?
MR. EMERSON: I do not think there's currently a
written agreement; I think it's been verbal in the past. And
when Kevin approached me about it, I told him -- I said, "You
really need a written agreement if this is what you want to
do."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Shouldn't they then bring it
back for approval when we have an agreement?
MR. EMERSON: I think they want to bless the
concept.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll move that we make space
available to Cameron County in the event of a disaster to
house juveniles, providing they -- there is space available
and that they provide staffing to handle the children that are
placed here.
JUDGE TINLEY: And pay all other expenses?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And pay all expenses incurred.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in
6-25-07
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'11 move
to Item 5; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
review Kerr County Rainwater Harvesting Program, being Court
Order Number 27352, and discuss that process. Commissioner
Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda, and
I -- I think Diane may have some information, I'm not sure, or
Rex may have some information. In a past court order from
2001, we authorized a credit to give, but anytime anyone has
tried to do this, they've been told that -- that there's no
such credit, being the Appraisal District who passed that on.
So, I think if we're going to have this court order and do it,
we need to figure out how we're going to do it, because
currently it's not being done. And I believe that there is
some issue as to -- Diane has -- the Tax Assessor was looking
into it.
MS. BOLIN: It's called a legality issue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The legality of us giving the
credit for this reason. Rex?
MR. EMERSON: Can I add my two cents?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Please.
6-25-07
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. EMERSON: Diane asked me to look into this, and
I received a call from the tax attorney in Austin that
represents the County. He's basically said he could not find
any statutory authority for the County to issue that tax
abatement. I've gone in and looked extensively on
Lexis-Nexis; I have not been able to find any statutory
authority. I've asked Bill Williams to look into it, since he
was originally the sponsor of it. I talked to David Motley,
since he was in office at the time, and nobody's been able to
come up with any statutory authority for the Court to issue
that tax credit.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can -- in lieu of the credit, is
it -- is there any authority for the County just to give a --
a payment? I mean, is there -- I don't know how it's called.
I mean, is there --
MR. EMERSON: Possibly, after research. You know,
as the Court's well aware, the County can't give, you know,
citizens tax money for private development on private land.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is the agenda item, as couched this
morning, adequate to -- to rescind the referenced court order
there?
MR. EMERSON: I would think so, Judge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion, since we
can't do it, that we rescind Court Order 27352 dated
6-25-07
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
December 10th, 2001, relating to a tax credit for rainwater
harvesting. And we will continue -- we will look at this and
see if there's any -- if we need to bring it back in the
future or not.
JUDGE TINLEY: But the motion is to rescind the
court order?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second that.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second to
rescind Court Order Number 27352 dated December 10, 2001. Any
question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just want to make a point.
In 2001, when this court order was passed, Commissioner Letz
and myself voted against. (Laughter.) Knowing that it wasn't
the right thing to do. That's all.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we lost.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we lost. But we were
right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We were right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you care to add that the other two
that are present here today weren't even here then?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the other two that are
here today weren't even here then.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry I brought it up.
6-25-07
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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's only taken six years to
figure out it wasn't right.
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. Let's go to
Item 6, please. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to accept an Amish Country Gazebo as a gift from
Mr. Gene Lehmann in honor of his late wife, Frances Lehmann.
Commissioner Baldwin.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, sir. I apologize,
I left my book. Would you go into my office and get that book
of gazebos? There's a photograph in there. Thank you. As
the backup states, Mr. Lehmann, one of his folks approached me
last week and requested that he donate a gazebo for the
courthouse lawn. And as we talked about it -- thank you very
much -- we talked about it, we thought it would be a good idea
to replace the fountain, the old fountain that hasn't worked
in years, with this gazebo. And here's a -- here's a
photograph, Judge, if you'd like to pass that around, please,
that Mr. Lehmann has chosen. And it's my understanding that
he will make -- he will purchase the entire gazebo, send it in
here in a kit form, and Tim and his staff will put it
6-25-07
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
together. There's some small details that we will have to
discuss at some point, like I think there's a probably
electricity still out there for the fountain, so this thing
has lights in it and a ceiling fan, and so we're going to need
some electricity at least out there, and getting those kind of
things wired up. Tim seems to think that he can put it
together, and the particular one that Mr. Lehmann chose,
that's beautiful, and I think it would be a great addition to
our courthouse lawn, replacing the fountain that doesn't even
work, so it just kind of makes sense to me. Tim, do you want
to -- what are you going to add to it?
MR. BOLLIER: I think it's a great idea. That's all
I got to say. I think it'll make the front of the courthouse
look really well. It'll complement the courthouse.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's it made out of?
MR. BOLLIER: It's vinyl, made out of that vinyl
stuff that it's going to be -- it won't -- it will be
maintenance-free, more or less. All you'll have to do is kind
of go out there, replace a light bulb here and there every now
and then, probably go out there and wash it off with a water
hose every now and then. And other than that, there's not
much maintenance to it.
JUDGE TINLEY: For those of you that may not be
aware of Mr. Gene Lehmann, he -- he and his late partner,
Gordon Monroe, were responsible for a great deal of
6-25-07
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
development in this area, virtually all of Kerrville South,
the area south of the river. He donated the land upon which
the ambulatory care center is now located. I believe he also
donated a portion of the land for the -- where the new
hospital is being built. So, he's been a tremendous asset to
this community and this area, and this is just one more
demonstration of his --
MR. BOLLIER: Did you mention the park?
JUDGE TINLEY: Just recently, for enhancement of the
Louise Hayes Park, a new section for it, to the City. That
was just recently dedicated also. So, this is just another
example of his gratitude to the community that's been awfully
good to him, and in honor of his wife of many years, who
passed away several years ago.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Buster, there is a -- my
recollection is that there's another plaque on that fountain.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How do you propose -- or how
does someone propose to acknowledge that family as well as --
you know, put two plaques on the gazebo? Or I presume some
kind of recognition will be on the gazebo.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have spoken with the
original family that put in the water fountain, and it's been
two years, two and a half years ago since I've had this
conversation, but he felt like that there -- there was no
6-25-07
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
problem. You know, the family didn't have an interest in it.
I don't know how to word it without stepping on toes, but they
just simply didn't have a problem with us -- at that point, we
were talking about tearing -- just tearing it down and putting
a new fountain up, and he says the family didn't have a
problem with us doing that. There's not a name on that
plaque, just "pioneer family."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pioneer family?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I don't know if it
would be appropriate to put their plaque on Mr. Lehmann's --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Would there be somewhere
within the courthouse or somewhere on the courthouse grounds
that it could be maintained, the one existing plaque?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Yeah, that'd be fine,
sure.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it's a great idea. I
can remember years past, when the fountain was working, it was
a target for some of our juveniles around that put various
things in it that caused lots of problems, and the pumps
didn't last very long. And I support the idea.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good idea. This
is one of the few courthouse additions that I'm in favor of
from a grounds standpoint.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As you can see, it's an
absolutely beautiful -- this choo-choo train on top's got to
6-25-07
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
that's up on top, that maybe we have a weather vane on top
that -- and the weather vane be an outline of Kerr County.
And I think that would be --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you on that.
MR. BOLLIER: -- appropriate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So I move that we accept the
gift from Mr. Lehmann, the gift of a pagoda -- 12-foot pagoda
gazebo.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any further question or discussion on the motion?
MR. BOLLIER: Just one other thing. We didn't
discuss this, but there's the color of it, the color of the
shingles that go on there, that maybe we might just discuss
what color we do want on there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think Mr. Lehmann needs to
22
23 or --
24
25 and pink.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Long as it's not purple, pink,
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, we don't want purple
make that decision.
MR. BOLLIER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
6-25-07
36
1
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. BOLLIER: Well, no.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's probably going to be green
or dark red or something like that, or gray.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'll trust Gene's decision on that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. Personally, if I
were going to make the decision, I would do the cedar shakes
to relate to our local -- but I like what's on there, what
we're seeing.
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it could be blue and
gold, as far as I'm concerned.
MR. BOLLIER: I was fixing to say the same thing. I
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.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to
Item 7; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
authorize representatives of Kerr County Commissioners Court
to engage in discussions with elected officials of the City of
Kerrville concerning use of Kerr County property adjacent or
near Kerr County Law Enforcement Center by the City of
Kerrville for city police and/or courts and other law
6-25-07
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
enforcement-related uses. Commissioner Baldwin, I believe you
had floated this idea originally sometime back, and after we
discussed it, we put on it the agenda. The Sheriff had
mentioned he's got a good deal of space out there. So, I'll
let you run with it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. I'll get it
started, and then we'll all hop in. This Court appointed
Commissioner Letz and I to meet with the City folks to see if
this was a feasible idea for them. And I want to say this at
the outset here; that I don't see -- there is zero benefit to
Kerr County, itself. There's a benefit to the taxpayers and
the protection of the life and property of the taxpayers, but
as far as a benefit to Kerr County, it is not. It is a major
benefit to the city of Kerrville, in my opinion, and that is
allowing the City to build a new police station on our
property adjoining the Sheriff's Office, and combining some
functions so law enforcement will -- in all of the entire
county will be together. Rusty, are you going to -- are you
going to comment on this in any way?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: After I comment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not unless I'm requested to.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But we had our committee
meeting, and with Rusty and the Police Chief and volunteer
fire department, and I think Commissioner Letz has reported on
6-25-07
38
1
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 meeting. The Police Chief seemed to think that it wasn't
a good idea because of the city plan that is moving forward,
whatever that is. I saw some of it in the paper last week.
But -- so, in our committee meeting, he kind of nixed it or
was a little bit negative to it, and, personally, I don't
understand that. So, I personally want to take it to the next
level. I want -- I want Commissioner Letz and I to be able to
go to City Council -- City Council members that they have
chosen to deal with this, and I want to take them to the
County Jail and Sheriff's Office and have a walk-through so
that we -- you know, hands-on, play in the dirt type thing, so
they can see exactly what we're talking about. We're not
trying to, again, do anything to take away from the City to
benefit the County. That's -- that's not the point. The
point is to -- to enhance law enforcement in this county, and
that's the only thing that we're trying to do. So, I guess
I'm coming to you today to ask for permission from the Court
to stay the course and keep moving forward with it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My comment is -- I'll just
backtrack just a little bit. The -- I mean, the meeting that
Commissioner Baldwin referred to was a joint dispatch meeting.
I think, you know, us on the Court understood that, but to
make sure the audience knows as well, that we met on joint
dispatch, and the Sheriff came up with a proposal to kind of
-- or floated this idea and concept at that meeting, that
6-25-07
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
there's property out there that the County owned that they did
not see any long-term use for the jail. If that was -- the
jail's extended at some point, it would go a different
direction, and that it was a way that joint dispatch could
work, if, you know, we had the two facilities, being the
police -- the city police station and the Sheriff's Department
and jail, all located in near proximity. As Commissioner
Baldwin said, it didn't receive an overly enthusiastic
reception by the Police Chief, but, you know, I agree with
Commissioner Baldwin; I think it needs to go to the next
level. They are doing a long-range plan. I said
nonenthusiastic; let me backtrack. The Police Chief, I
recall, said it was not in their five-year planning horizon.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was what his actual words
were, and didn't see pursuing it, really. My understanding,
from what I read in the paper, the City is going through a new
comprehensive plan, looking at facilities and things of that
nature, and I think that we just -- the -- I agree with
Commissioner Baldwin. Let's, you know, sort of shelve the
dispatch idea; let's go to the next level that would help get
to the joint dispatch. It would be to formally talk to the
City about that property is available, and would be a huge
benefit to the taxpayers of this county, and especially in the
city. I mean, I don't know what that land's worth, but I
6-25-07
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
would suspect it's in the million dollar area for the -- the
amount of acreage that we would be willing to give -- to give
or long-term lease to the City at no cost, 'cause we think it
is a benefit to the community. And I think that it's a --
hopefully the City will take it very seriously, look at this.
And we're basically giving them -- or offering them
free real estate -- prime real estate, I might add -- to build
a new jail on -- or new police station on, which they
overwhelmingly say they need. And as a part of that,
long-range, it would also solve their court problem, because
we have a court -- J.P. 2 uses the courtroom out there, which
is under-utilized; it's available. It would solve that whole
problem for them, the space standpoint of having a court. It
would be a way to jointly use some facilities that the County
has. And I think there's some other things that the Sheriff
has talked about, about. You know, you may have a joint break
room and a few other -- joint training. We already have a lot
of training equipment that we -- that the County has that can
be made available at no cost to the City. The joint break
room would get law enforcement people throughout the county
together, mingling, talking, hopefully solving problems. So,
I think it is a tremendous offer, and I hope the City takes it
seriously. And I -- if Commissioner Baldwin makes a motion,
I'll be glad to second that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That we appoint ourselves?
6-25-07
41
1
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: That we appoint ourselves to
continue talking with the City on this issue.
JUDGE TINLEY: The key issue is that y'all will be
talking to the elected officials.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: That are making the political
I decisions --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I'm through talking to
Rusty about it.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that affect the taxpayers. And I
think there are a lot of efficiencies that can be gained for
both organizations, and I think they need to, at a minimum, be
explored, and I think it's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell you, all of those
things are neat that you brought up, Rusty, but my favorite
thing is that training room and how that thing is wired,
computerized, two big screens; you can sit there with an
instructor out of San Antonio or Austin and be trained --
certified, trained. And I -- that is neat. That's a neat
thing that we have there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think, you know, just one
other thing. I mean, this is -- we're not talking about
joining or anything. They're still going to be a -- the
City's going to run their own deal; the County's going to run
their deal. We're just going to share some facilities to the
6-25-07
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
benefit of the taxpayers. That's the bottom line.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it's a -- you know, to me, I
don't see any negatives to certainly pursuing it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There is one addition that came
up after our meeting that I think should be looked at. And I
guess it will be out very soon anyhow; it was made official to
me last week, is the Kerrville D.P.S. station is shutting down
their dispatch. Sheriff's Office, unbeknownst to us, until we
were informed, will be doing all the dispatching for all the
highway patrol and D.P.S. in this area, in Kerr County.
Either us or San Antonio will be. But they have elected to
close their dispatch office. Don't ask me why; I can't tell
you. You could ask the sergeant to come in. They didn't tell
us officially, so we're adopting that. And the City has a lot
of dispatch, and that would put our dispatch center for all
law enforcement, which I think is just an additional reason to
really consider it seriously at this time. We're not trying
to take over anything. And that training room can dub as an
E.O.C., an emergency operation center that has direct contact
with Austin, San Antonio, and everywhere else around here.
It's just -- I think it's a feasible idea.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see that --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I really hope the City takes
us seriously and really looks at it hard. It's an opportunity
6-25-07
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to enhance the program that already exists and get them on the
same piece of property, where it makes everything so much
easier to do. Whenever they arrest somebody, whenever they
need training, whatever, it's just a good -- it's a win-win
deal, looks to me like.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And I can't imagine them not
taking advantage of this opportunity, to -- to at least
explore the idea and the cost, and at least start planning in
the future for this, and not -- not just -- just forget about
it. They need to put it on the front burner, in my opinion,
and go forward. This is a really good opportunity for
everybody.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The whole bottom line --
you're absolutely right. The whole bottom line is an
opportunity to save lives and property for our citizens. And,
you know, we're all -- you know, law enforcement is expensive,
and we all understand that. But it's also something that is a
necessity, and the taxpayers demand it, and us, as leaders,
are going to provide it. And that's what -- that's what the
whole thing is about.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I make a motion that
Commissioner Baldwin and Commissioner Letz -- authorize them
to have a meeting with the City Council to offer a plan to
build a new police station on county property.
6-25-07
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 8; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
appoint Ray Garcia to the Kerr County Child Service Board.
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, sir. We have an
opening on our Kerr County Child Service Board, and Mr. Garcia
came through last week and voiced an interest in it. And we
had him in the board -- the last board meeting, and he
indicated to us that he would be willing to serve. And his
resume -- or his background, of course, is in the -- in the
agenda -- I mean in the packet here, so -- and we all know him
anyway. And so it's good to see a young man come in and
willing to serve, and in other places than just his paid job.
So, with that, Judge, I will move that we appoint Ray Garcia
as a member of the Kerr County Child Service Board.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in
6-25-07
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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. Item 9;
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to set up
budget workshops on the following dates, first one being
July 17th, 2007, that being City/County joint operations,
employee health benefits, reorganization issues, and Human
Resources. July 18, '07, organizational development, step and
grade schedule, Nondepartmental, Commissioners Court,
Information Technology, District Courts, District Attorneys.
July 24th, '07, County Clerk, County Court at Law, Juvenile
Probation, Adult Probation, District Clerk, J.P.'s 1, 2, 3 and
4, Constables 1, 2, 3 and 4, County Attorney, County Auditor,
County Treasurer, Facilities and Maintenance. And July 31,
2007, Sheriff's Office and Jail, D.P.S., Road and Bridge,
Juvenile Detention Facility, Environmental Health, Extension
Service, County-sponsored, and Collections. We've got at
least three that -- four, actually, that I don't see in here.
One is Animal Control.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's Jody's fault. I did
my part.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Now, we have County Judge and
County Court, and then we have Juvenile Probation.
6-25-07
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And Courthouse Security.
MS. BOLIN: And the Tax Assessor.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're not there?
MS. BOLIN: No, I'm not there.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just a minor one.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's a reason you're not there.
MS. BOLIN: I was beginning to wonder.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're going to let you operate out of
the Sheriff's budget this year.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh.
MS. BOLIN: Oh. Okay, Rusty, look out.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the Tax Assessor would
fit on July 24th.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think Courthouse Security
would go on the 31st.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah, that's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me say something before
we get too far into this thing. Jody and I just simply took
last year's meeting dates and just kind of mirrored them with
the -- the schedule that we had from last year, and I kind of
fixed the dates that, of course, fit my schedule. But --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Obviously.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So this -- this is simply a
6-25-07
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
recommendation.	If we	need	to change	dates	and	that	kind of
thing, that's --	you're	not	going to	upset	me,	Jon,	in any
way.
JUDGE TINLEY: The only mention I would make, most
of these are on Tuesday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don`t have a problem with that, as
long as we can start, say, beginning about 10:30. If you want
to move them all to Wednesday, that's great; we can start at
9:00 if you want to do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I like that idea. Start
early.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I do too. That's fine.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Too late in the day to start
anything at 10:30.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't have a calendar -- or
do I?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Be 18, 25, and August 1 --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- if they were all Wednesdays. Of
course, then you got July 17.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why not do the 11th, 18th, and
6-25-07
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25th?
missing.
right?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's groovy, dude.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 11th, 18th, and 25th.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Every Wednesday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 25 --
JUDGE TINLEY: And then August 1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: August 1.
JUDGE TINLEY: 9 a.m.?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 9 a.m. Be here, be square.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just plug in anything that's
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MS. BOLIN: And you're going to put me on the 25th,
JUDGE TINLEY: Pardon?
MS. BOLIN: I'm going to the 25th?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MS. BOLIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If you're not here, we'll take
care of it for you.
MS. BOLIN: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Be careful.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the 11th, can we add
personnel policy to that? 'Cause I think --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Surely.
6-25-07
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It looks like that's Ms. Hyde's
day. So -- and any revisions. 'Cause didn't the personnel
policy -- doesn't all that -- we've been talking about we need
to look at -- make sure it's all together and proper.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Think we can make that
determination?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I hope she can. All right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And these are strictly budget
workshops, no action to be taken out of these -- or during
these times.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hopefully, we'll come out of
there and take some action at some point.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I don't think we need to have
any formal motion on that. Do you, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, that's fine. I just
wanted to bring it up so we can get it going.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When do we have our city
~ meeting?
', JUDGE TINLEY: That`s still in development. We've
i had a number of dates proposed, and the ping-gong match is
underway.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we -- yeah.
6-25-07
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. GRINSTEAD: August 6th. was what they think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: August 6th looks like a
possible? Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else on that
particular item, gentlemen? We'll move to Item 10; consider,
discuss, take appropriate action to accept the resignation of
Bruce Baker from the Advisory Board of the library.
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. I just happened
to be here last week when Mr. Baker came in and turned in his
resignation, and I just happen to be his -- his Commissioner.
And I -- so I think that's the reason he came to me, and that
it didn't have anything to do with library appointments. But
I'd like to read his -- his letter into the record, if I may.
"Dear Buster: I believe the mindset of the present
Administration makes it impossible for me to provide a
positive contribution to the work of the Library Board.
Likewise, current trends limit the library's ability to serve
the Kerrville/Kerr County community. Therefore, I submit my
resignation as a county representative on the Advisory Board
of the library. Please convey to the rest of the Court my
appreciation..." Signed, Bruce Baker. So, I move that we
accept his resignation, and then I guess we start --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll second it. I had no --
we had a Library Board meeting last week; he didn't say
6-25-07
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we not accept it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, he wasn't -- he wasn't
real happy. I didn't spend a lot of time with him, but
there's lots of things said outside these written words, so I
don't think that he has much interest in --
JUDGE TINLEY: Continuing?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- continuing.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and second to accept
the resignation. Any question or discussion? All in favor of
the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll move
to Item 11; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
proposed updates and/or measures of the courthouse security
plan. I put this on the agenda. Over the past year or so,
there have been a few instances in which things have occurred
here in the courthouse that have indicated that there might be
a need for a little bit better security. I asked the -- the
individuals who are in charge of courthouse security, Chuck
Brecher, and -- and Dan Thomas to give me some ideas, some
very simple ideas -- I didn't want an elaborate anything --
6-25-07
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
that we might consider that might, by taking just a few simple
measures, improve the security here and make things a little
bit better. And they -- they have made a few minor
suggestions. I'll try and summarize them very quickly.
On the lower level of the courthouse, there's access
there that, if access is being controlled through the first
floor, access can come through the lower level of the
courthouse, get to the second floor, and you never know
they're here in the building. So, one suggestion was that
those doors downstairs that provide access to the lower level
be kept locked during normal business hours. There are crash
bars on -- on all of them, so that in case of fire or other
emergency, people can exit the building from down there, but
otherwise, that would allow access of the public in through
the first floor. In some instances, there might be a need to
control access where these east and west doors coming into the
new part of the courthouse up the ramps come in. In the case
of a high-profile trial with special security procedures, they
suggested, on a case-by-case basis, it might be necessary for
that purpose only to lock the front doors of the courthouse
facing Main, control all access so that they do have a handle
on what's going on.
Upstairs, the magnetic doors that go back into the
secure area of the courthouse, apparently sometimes those
magnetic doors don't always work as planned. There -- there's
6-25-07
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
been an instance or two in which persons have been found back
in the secure area as a result of, apparently, those magnetic
doors failing. As a result, the recommendation was that --
that we have deadbolts put in place on those two doors, and
during nonbusiness hours, that those deadbolts could be
activated, and that way we know things are secure during
normal business hours. If there's a particular reason, again,
such as the instance of a high profile trial with special
security measures in force, to activate the deadbolt on one of
them and require the other one to be monitored, there's a lady
there to monitor those.
The other mention had to do with parking spaces,
maybe getting Road and Bridge to make new signs on reserved
spaces by number, rather than by individual or office, to
prevent elected officials or other persons being targeted by
vandals or other persons that may be displeased with the
activities or actions or decisions of a particular individual.
Certainly, that's not meant to supplant any long-term security
plans. I know we've got an office upstairs on the second
floor in which the long-term intent, according to my
understanding, is to put in monitors there, to -- to have feed
from security cameras in various parts of the courthouse as we
move forward with a permanent long-term security plan. But
the ones here are just some pretty simple measures that would
require little or no expenditure of funds in order to just put
6-25-07
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in some safety gaps where -- where there otherwise had been
some problems.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only question I have is on
the -- well, the only -- magnetic strip doors.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't we just fix the
magnetic strip doors? I mean --
JUDGE TINLEY: Good question. I'm told that -- that
they're not infallible, and occasionally they don't always
work as intended. And one way to be sure that they're being
effective is by the deadbolt procedure. Of course, during
normal business. hours, why, that deadbolt would be -- would be
open.
MR. EMERSON: I think part of the problem with those
doors, Jonathan, is that in mediations and a number of other
instances where there's meetings that are held in those jury
rooms, a lot of people are given access to that code, and the
code is not regularly changed, necessarily. Because of that,
people that shouldn't have access beyond their limited time
period do.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- securing the lower level of
the courthouse and allowing access to only those with keys,
the Sheriff has some -- has expressed some concerns about
anytime you have an employee that departs, if you don't secure
all the keys, then you got to rekey. Seems like we may have
6-25-07
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
that problem anyway, but, you know, there may be a better
long-term solution; key pads, electronic magnetic strip cards,
or something of that nature. What I'm looking at is something
little or no cost, short-term benefit, until we can -- until
we can come up with something a little bit more permanent, and
hopefully not too much more expensive.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the deadbolt -- on those
magnetic strip doors, then, I mean, there's only going to be a
reason to add a deadbolt to the one without the -- without the
window where someone's watching and can let people in, right?
I mean, there's no reason -- this one already has -- that one
over here has the window there where someone can be let in
there. It seems that -- I hate to have too much limited
access, start having deadbolts on there. Then the Sheriff's
not going to be able to get in if he has to get in. I mean, I
can see locking people in or locking people out.
JUDGE TINLEY: The deadbolt would primarily be in
order to make sure that it's secure during non-business hours.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you have a deadbolt and
something happens in there and they go run and lock the
deadbolts, I see that can be turned around, you know, to our
detriment, or the Sheriff's possible detriment. I don't know.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: May I speak? Number one, if
somebody has concerns about security at the courthouse, I wish
they would first come to me, since I'm in charge of security
6-25-07
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
at the courthouse, and not read it on an agenda item. Number
two is, deadbolts will not work on those doors because of fire
escape hazards and ways to get out. Number three is, it's not
the magnetic strips that are failing. It's when they forget
to lock a courtroom door, and you can go in through the
courtroom and go out into the hallway the other way. It's not
the deal. Now, what Rex brought up is a good point, because
unfortunately, other employees up there will give the code out
to other ones that come in. Not the security personnel, but
the codes to get around. And you end up gradually, after a
time, having to recode. Maybe it's time to recode it.
For the last number of years, I have brought up
things during budget time, and that's normally when I bring it
up, because it is an expense to upgrade and do things with the
courthouse. The first deal was in the old '05-'06 budget, we
asked for a lot. It was a complete camera system that was
recorded along with panic buttons and everything. The total
was about $96,000. The Court opted at that time not to do
that. In '06-'07, this year, I do have a second employee up
there, and we did upgrade a metal detector -- bought a new
metal detector, so we have done some. I did send the two
courthouse security officers through a courthouse security
school this year too, which is also why you have other ideas
come up. The renumbering and redoing the parking spaces
downstairs, that's a simple fix, and I think it should be
6-25-07
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
done, and that can be done at zero or very low cost, maybe
even getting Maintenance just to assign numbers instead of
names. It helps with security for certain individuals when
somebody doesn't like them.
My understanding is the courthouse is locked at
night. It is unlocked about 6:00 in the morning, when
Maintenance gets here, and it's in between that time, or maybe
sometime before it was locked at night, when they've had a
late trial, somebody sneaks in and sleeps in a bathroom or
something. That can be addressed short-term by me changing my
courthouse security's working hours, and have one come on
early and one come on late. I don't have a problem -- and
check the doors and check everything in the courthouse before
they go home. You will see in this year's budget, when we get
to that, there is a plan of $9,000 to put key pads on all the
bottom floor doors, and I think that is by far the best
solution. We have gone through issuing keys, and you never
get them back. Somebody loses one, and you end up having to
rekey a whole lot of locks. And the expense, that just adds
up. Glenn Holekamp and I went through that quite a bit. So,
I think the key pads are much wiser. Now, if you look --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, before you leave key
pads, what's the cost difference between using magnetic strip
cards as opposed to key pads?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, the key pads is a basic
6-25-07
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
operation. If you look in the budget -- and there is
something in there. We haven't got to budget, but on a letter
dated May the 9th from Guardian, who we got the
recommendations from, it says, "Equipment listed will allow
you to control entry by assigning codes to employees needing
entry." It will also be the basic equipment to allow a true
access control system, where you provide a key tag or badge
which can be placed in proximity to a card reader, which will
allow you to have an audit trail, a trail of all employees who
enter. Add the controller cards will not only provide an
audit trail, but if an employee leaves, you simply take them
out of the system. If they do not return the badge and try to
use it later, you will be alerted of the attempted entry. It
logs all that.
Also, this system will soon work in conjunction with
the camera system, which can be for the future upgrades, and
if you click on a particular employee who has badged in, you
will be able to see a video of that entry to make sure it is
that employee. So, it's a long-range solution, gradually. I
think the Court's done real well, okay? We've doubled the --
doubled by putting another person here. We have upgraded
metal detectors. It's just when you go to actual entries,
this courthouse has a lot of entries that are unknown to the
public, because this is a very old courthouse. It's got a lot
of ways to move around in it. We have brought over the
6-25-07
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Special Operations Unit of the city and county and even
exercised in this courthouse at night for security reasons.
But a lot of it's going to be -- right now it's easier
man-on-man. But the proposal that I put in budget this year
is $10,000. I'll wait till budget time to see if that goes
through. If you want to do that sooner, believe me, as head
of courthouse security, I have no problem in doing it sooner,
but I put it in the budget.
Now, there is another system that was presented
before, too, which is $31,000, and I think in emergency
situations, it would be by far the best system, and it was a
system that not only goes with the key pad entry and that --
it's additional, but it's a button system, panic button,
where, number one, your two courthouse bailiffs have pagers or
radios on them. One button is if anybody in the courthouse in
any area needs some assistance, they can push it. It just
goes to that security officer, goes to his radio, telling him
they need security. The other button is an emergency button,
which if anybody pushes that button, it goes to every patrol
car I have on the street and tells them there is an emergency
at the courthouse, where they're running here with lights and.
siren. So, it depends on what you want to do. And all these
have been presented. Now, I will hang the first employee that
presses that emergency button when it's unneeded. The Tax
Assessor --
6-25-07
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS.	BOLIN:	You've	been here when we had those
little panic	buttons	in our	office.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Those panic buttons don't work.
MS. BOLIN: That's true.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This one is not for that. One
just calls the -- the security officer. The other one goes
county-wide on our primary radio system and tells them there
is an emergency. So, this -- but I think these solutions have
been brought up. I think we're on the right trail. I think
this County's done right in adding another person to it,
'cause to me, there's nothing better than actual people
walking through. But I don't agree with keys, because keys
just end up being lost, forgotten, then you rekey everything.
I know y'all can remember how many times we've rekeyed
different areas in this courthouse, that just -- they don't
work.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I always try to move away -- I
would agree with that, totally get away from keys in all entry
doors, and use the swipes or magnetic, whatever those little
reader cards are. They're more -- much more secure.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff, I'm a little confused about
your statement that your first knowledge of these matters was
reading an agenda item. The discussions I had with the
designated courthouse security personnel that -- that I have
direct contact with, that I asked for very simple
6-25-07
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
recommendations, brought me a draft, and indicated that --
that they were forwarding it directly to you. And, of course,
it indicates on its face that it was forwarded to you more
than 10 days ago.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The draft was forwarded to me,
and I had a talk with the security personnel about doing that
kind of stuff. And the first time I knew that anybody was
going to put anything on the agenda, other than what we have
already talked -- and you have a copy of my budget request,
Judge -- was when you put on it the agenda. And my deal is,
I'm not that concerned about it. I think we're all headed in
the right direction, and courthouse does need to be addressed.
I just -- if I'm in charge of the budget, I'd like to know
what's going on before I see it in the agenda.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I want to be clear. So, then,
your -- you indicated you were first aware of these only when
you saw the agenda item. You were actually aware of the
specific proposals before then, but you just weren't aware
they were going to be put on the agenda.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The first recommendation I
got -- and I don't know if you even got it, because it's when
we talked about what we were going to do for courthouse
security -- was the recommendation that came in in April, and
that's what I've been working off of, until they were told to
6-25-07
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
give you a recommendation last week or week before.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And I think you'll find that`s
a different letter.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, the one I'm looking at is
addressed to you dated June 14.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, and I got it after you
did. And we had already put those -- I don't discuss all my
plans on what we're going to ask for in the budget with all my
employees every time. I don't think it's necessary. So, if
there were questions, you had my budget and you had what I was
putting in it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I didn't perceive this to have
any significant budgetary impact.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. But I think we are
headed in the right direction. There are some additions,
especially with this courthouse, that can definitely be made.
And I brought up certain ones every year at budget time, and
if this county can afford them, we'll go with them, and if
not, we'll do the best we can.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to point out
something. We've talked about people getting from outside in
the courthouse. I happened to be here last week in the
evening time, and a trial ended upstairs. I was just up there
watching, and it was evening, and there was this herd, or
6-25-07
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
maybe it was a covey, of lawyers wandering around the hallway
that couldn't get out. Doors were locked. And, boy, I'd have
given anything if I'd have thought through that and just left
them in here, but I had to unlock the door with my key to let
them out these side doors.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There was most likely a
security person still upstairs taking care of the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely, there was. There
was still two here. And also, there's a door that you just
mash the bar around the corner. But I'm a Commissioner and
they're lawyers, so, you know, there wasn't enough brainpower
there to open the door. (Laughter.)
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, it's -- even, like, in
this last month was a good example of what happens. The
security personnel up there normally work the same hours
everybody else does at this courthouse. This last month
alone, I've turned in 22 hours of overtime for one of them
because of the late trials and staying late to make sure
things are secure. And if the Court wishes -- and it may be
something I need to consider about redoing some work schedules
on those two to put them first here and last to leave every
day the courthouse is open, so they can check these offices
and rooms.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we unlock the doors
in the morning too early. I do.
6-25-07
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
JUDGE TINLEY: One of the recommendations on here
that was given to me was that we can unlock them at, you know,
quarter to 8:00, thereabouts.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: As opposed to 7:00 or before.
Q (By Sheriff Hierholzer) Well, you do have some
officials that I know, and some judges -- you know, District
Court -- that do get here very early, because they're getting
their stuff to go to another county or something. Those, we
do have keys with. There's no -- no problem there. But the
general courthouse, that can very well be considered as to
upgrade the security, is not unlocking quite as early as we
do. But I -- you know, some of this -- and we have to always
keep in mind such as if we go to the key pad, then the fire
department and them are going to have that key, okay? Or that
code to be able to get in, because it's not only the pushbar
to get out to equal the fire code; it's getting firemen in, as
was pointed out to me a while ago. And if you go to locks,
just regular key locks, then you've got to have that secure
area where the lock is kept. And I know there's one here, but
every time you change it, you've got to remember to change
them. So, there's a lot of things that affect when you look
at it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Have you looked in your -- you
gave us two budget items, an $11,000 one and -- I think
6-25-07
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
T1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11,000 -- and a 31,000.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And a 96,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And a 96,000. Do one of those
cover putting the magnetic strip --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The 11,000 -- 9,900-something.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's all doors in the
courthouse?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's for all the lower doors
in the courthouse.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: "Lower" being basement?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What about --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is what's in the budget
proposal for this year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's the basic. For the --
the additional, you can build onto that same system without
replacing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you have a number, or can you
have a budget number to do all doors in the courthouse with
that -- with a reader system?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What do you do on the public
access ones?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You open the door during the
day, but if Commissioner Baldwin comes in Sunday, he has to
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
66
use that reader card where it keeps a record of it, as opposed
to using a key. Get rid of all the keys.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, I can get you that type of
bid. There's no problem there. That company does that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think if we can get away from
keys, it's probably better.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think our normal public
entrance, like up here, is not included in that bid.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I'd just like to know
what it would cost to do all of them so we can keep track of
it, 'cause I think that's also a way to -- I would expect that
with that, you could electronically lock down all the doors
instantly.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Probably could.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which I think would be --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, remember, that 9,000 is
the -- is the basic part. It's the key pad downstairs, and
it's not the camera that logs in and shows it, okay? But it's
the foundation for it all to be added onto. I was trying to
upgrade it in sections. But if you want a full proposal for
already having that, I'll be more than happy to get you one by
August 1st, before our budget discussion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like to see what it costs to
do the whole courthouse, the electronic system.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No problem.
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
67
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are we doing anything today?
JUDGE TINLEY: It's your pleasure.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If you want to start with the
9,000 -- if you want to take some type of action today, I can
tell you, you know, if it's -- if y'all would like, I'll redo
work schedules to help that part out. Some areas, it may
cause a little bit more overtime. Other areas, it won't. If
you want me to get with Maintenance -- 'cause even before --
or while Glenn Holekamp was here, all keys were issued out by
Maintenance, and they kept a log. I doubt if they keep that
log any more. But if you want me to take back over some of
those issues, I can sure do that. Or if you want to go with
the preliminary of 9,000 before budget time, then I can do
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why don't you come back at our
next meeting with specific -- you know, with --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll be out of town on your
next meeting. I can have one of my people -- be more than
happy to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Some of this stuff didn't have
any cost attributed to it. We can't just authorize doing
something on it without having -- knowing where the money's
coming from. The only one that I can see we can really do
today out of this is the --
JUDGE TINLEY: Lower level.
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
68
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I was thinking of the
signs, the renaming.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The signs on the spaces is a
simple fix. If you want me to go ahead and do that, we can
get initiated on that. And then, I think, between that and
changing some shifts or working hours, then I can take care of
a lot of this other.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're talking about parking
signs?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Parking. It's not signs.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Instead of saying
"Commissioner."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, I become a number?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You become a number. That's
all you've been for a long time, Buster.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can I have my picture put on
it with my number?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, yours will be the only
one out there, so everybody knows who to target.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only other thing, the
courthouse employees do have a problem where -- like I
understand, and I told Eva this when she told me about it,
last Thursday, I guess, was the first day I knew it, where she
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
69
walked in and there was a transient or somebody in one of the
restrooms. If that happens, I want to know about it
immediately so that I can address it and see what we can do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we can start locking the
basement doors. We can --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I'm not sure -- the
basement doors are locked. They're locked at night. It's
just what time they're open in the morning, and who it is that
checks them at night. And if you've got somebody from
Juvenile Probation that comes in during the night and leaves
or whatever, okay, all doors to the courthouse are locked at
night. It's just what time they get opened and what kind of
check is made when they are locked.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why do -- why do they need to be
opened?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, they get opened for
employees to come in. A lot of them stay locked. Pushbar
doors normally stay locked. The glass door in front of Rex's
normally stays locked, but they are pushbar.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't see the reason why any
of those need to be unlocked from the outside. If you need to
get --
JUDGE TINLEY: On the lower level? I don't either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think they all be should be
locked from the outside all the time.
6-25-07
~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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That`s just an instruction; I
don't have a problem doing it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If someone has a key, they can
get in. If not, they use --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Come around.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Come up here. I think that's --
yeah, I'm in favor of that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree with that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think we can handle a lot of
this until budget time with what we have.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other thing you can do -- so
you can do that one. The shift change can be done, and then
we start the --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Parking space.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- parking space.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What about -- what about not
unlocking the doors before 7:50?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. That goes, to me, with
shift change.
MR. ALFORD: I've walked in here -- especially on
Tuesdays, when we have court, there's guys in here at 7:20,
7:15 in the morning, and I'm always kind of leery to walk
around the comer and go, "Oh, good morning." Most of them
get here about 7:15. We got the keys anyway.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I know sometimes we do have to
6-25-07
1
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
bring inmates over about 7:30, things like that. I would
recommend let's not unlock them until 7:30.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 7:30 is okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If we do, I'll have one of my
courthouse security individuals do the unlocking.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think -- I'm not sure about the
need to be adjusting schedules. Oftentimes when court's in
session -- I can understand we have to stay over if a -- if
one of the courts carries a case late in the evening. But --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, one thing I would like,
if an employee like Eva walks into a restroom down there and
there's a transient sleeping in it, and it is early in the
morning before 7:00, I'd like to know that one of my guys is
here already to deal with that. Now, not --
JUDGE TINLEY: And if we're not opening the
courthouse until at least 7:30, --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's why --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- lower level doors are locked,
we've pretty well eliminated that occurring, as opposed to
opening things up at 7 o'clock.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And what I'm saying,
dependent -- the work schedule would be dependent on what time
I
I
you want the courthouse open in the mornings.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
6-25-07
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
in.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's when I'll have them come
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we open the courthouse at
7:30, I'd let them be at 7:00. One starts at 7:00, one get
off at 6:00.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's no -- it's just a work
schedule change. That doesn't matter.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Pretty minor.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay?
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We thrash that one out all
we're going to do today?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Why don't we take about a
15-minute recess, then?
(Recess taken from 10:32 a.m. to 10:53 a.m.}
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if we
might. We were in recess for a few moments. Next item on the
agenda is Item 12; consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to finalize Youth Exhibit Center and Union Church
reservation and booking policy and procedures. I believe
Commissioners Letz and Oehler have been working on this item.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Ms. Hyde, do you have more of
6-25-07
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
those copies for everybody else? I don't think they're in
the -- in part of the backup.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I'd like to bring up a
point. There is no backup.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, there is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Here it is?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You just now received it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Before -- let me make one
introductory comment before I turn it over to Bruce. The
intent isn't to act today. This is -- it's a lot to do, a lot
to look at. Let's kind of go over it, and then have everyone
think about it, adjust it, and hopefully at our next meeting
or the meeting after that, try to finalize this and put it to
bed for the next year, or longer. But we've spent -- Eva's
been a great help in going through a lot of the old records,
and we've been going through trying to figure out exactly what
we've been doing out there, trying to get everything into
bringing in a policy, and -- and we'll be talking more about
where we need to go.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Have you received the booking
information for the present year, up through the present time
and the rest of this budget year from Ms. Davidson?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I got everything I asked for.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. So, you did not ask for
the stuff that --
6-25-07
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 LETZ: The real current, I thought we
had the current.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We do not. We have not
received it. We've asked for it -- this will be the third
time. And so, you know, if you would do that, that would be
good, if we have that information to know where we are on our
bookings for the present year and into the future, past today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- what I --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: To know what kind of income
we're supposed to be getting, and we can make some projections
of costs and various things like that. I like what --
Jonathan and I both met with Ms. Hyde a couple weeks ago and
went over this proposed policy and made a few changes, and I
think it pretty well covers most of what we feel like needs to
be done. And I do think it's a good idea for you to read it
and go over it and ask questions and whatever, and -- and
maybe at the next meeting, be able to have good knowledge of
what -- what it is that we're looking at. And also, by that
time, the rates that you see over there on Page 2 are the
rates that we're presently charging, supposedly. And this can
all be and will be on the computer, so that whenever a booking
is done, it'll give you the bottom line total of how much is
owed for that event, and that will be electronically
~i transmitted from the booking agent directly to us and the
County Treasurer, the County Auditor, and Maintenance, so that
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
75
everybody knows what is coming up and what money is supposed
to be collected, and how much is supposed to be deposited.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What we're looking at also,
we've been trying to go back through the past two years, kind
of figuring out how -- we know how much it costs out there
annually, which is a big number, and we're getting a handle on
the number of days it's used. We'll take that cost, divide it
by the total number of days, and that's what, on average -- I
mean, of course, it'll vary a little bit depending on what
facilities are being used, but on average, that's how much we
should receive each day that place is booked. Now, this Court
may decide that we're going to -- and I think the Court will
decide that we're going to absorb all the 4-H dates, so it's
not -- we're not saying we're going to try to break even on
it. We're just saying that if we were collecting every time
it's used, we should be able to break even, and then we're
going to have some -- obviously, some discounted people that
use it, and we're going to have 4-H going to have it free.
So, we're not trying to balance it, 'cause that'll never
happen, but we're trying to -- at least if we were charging
every day, that's based on what we should be able to break
even at.
The current system has different percentage
reductions and different rates and all that. We've tried to
eliminate that. We're trying to come up with one rate
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
76
schedule, and then there's a -- depending on who it is, it's a
percentage reduction off the total, rather than have so many
different columns. If it's this person, you're on this
column; this person, you're on this column. We used to have
all these different rates, and we're trying to have one set of
rates. Then we can discount that based on if it's a certain
nonprofit that we choose to discount. So, we're changing it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The bottom line wouldn't
change.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's how you get there. It
will -- so someone just goes through, and if you want --
you're going to use the indoor arena, and you -- or say you're
going to use the Exhibit Hall; you pay 350. If you're going
to use the chairs, you're going to pay 75 cents apiece; 100
chairs, you fill in the numbers. This is in Excel. It will
calculate it all, it will total it, and that's your total.
Pretty simple. And then if you're going to give a discount to
it, you apply that discount rate, and half of that amount is a
deposit. It's a way to track it. There's a permanent record
for each one, so I think it'll work a lot better on keeping
the long-term tracking of the facility. Not sure exactly how
much changes Bruce and I are going to recommend on the rates.
Probably not a whole lot, because we don't really have a whole
lot of historical -- enough history really to look at it, see
where we're going, and we don't want to just make a bunch of
6-25-07
1
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
changes that aren't appropriate. So that we're headed -- you
know, there will probably be another adjustment a year from
~ now.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, it just appears that --
that we have not been getting the amount that is -- is stated
to be the rate, but that's maybe not because the money
wasn't -- the money wasn't charged. I think that there's been
too much leeway given to the booking agent to say, "Well,
okay, you can have -- you can get 75 percent off." You're
only paying 25 percent, and those kinds of things are really
supposed to come to the Court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me give you --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Unless you're on this list.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me give you an example
here, and that's Linda Decker's issue. They were charged last
year 162.50, and just looking at the chart that you provided,
I -- I can't see how you get to 162.50 anyway.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Exactly. So, anyway, I think
that -- and I think the most important statement on this whole
thing is the very last one, and that is there will be no
exceptions to rates unless so ordered by Commissioners Court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You know, that has not been
there, evidently, in the past, and it needs to be there. And
we're using taxpayer dollars to fund this facility, and it's
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
78
way past time to start generating more revenue to offset the
cost of that thing. And we're talking about doing some things
that are going to enhance it, and to be able to justify to the
taxpaying public that we're going to be doing the right thing,
and utilization of the money that comes in, that they pay us.
So, I -- you know, I feel like this is a good policy, and I
think -- like I said, I think everybody needs to digest it.
And if you have other -- other input, we need to have it
before the next meeting so that we can -- if it needs to be
included, we can include it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is -- there's currently --
and part of this, if we ever get to a court order, this is
going to cancel all previous orders related to the facility.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is a notebook full of
court orders as to who gets what rate when. And -- you know,
and different rates. And, I mean, that book Ms. Hyde's
holding up, that is all court orders related to charging
people for this facility. And, I mean, it's no telling -- or
no wonder that it's confused out there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you -- and you may
have gone through this, Bruce, and I was in a coma there for a
minute, but what do you do about -- or what is going to be
your proposal on Linda's issue that's a nonprofit, partially
owned by Kerr County employees and that kind of thing? Is
6-25-07
~.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
79
there a -- is there a category in there that you give
50 percent reduction or 75 percent reduction? Or --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, there's -- and I think
that's what -- it's on Page 2.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 75 percent?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It lists the types, and those
types will be listed on the back page showing what they are.
So, that gives you an automatic of what -- you know, what the
discount will be for those specific organizations. And
they're -- if an organization comes and they're not on the
list, they're going to have to bring it to the Court to get --
to get that rate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think the Court's going to
have to look at -- it's on Page 3 in here, the last two lines.
The most -- in 2001, we did an order that says 75 percent
discount to Kerr County nonprofits that have a 501(c)(3), and
50 percent discount to non-Kerr County nonprofits with
501(c)(3) That's where we are right now. I'm not sure
that's good. I'm not sure -- I mean, I think that's a
discussion this Court needs to have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. You're not sure that
it's bad either.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not sure that it's bad, not sure
it's good. But I do think that it needs to be a 501(c)(3) by
the I.R.S., and we need that certificate, period.
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
80
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, and approved by the
Court. It needs to be on our list. I mean, I think it's --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I feel like that we -- you
know, we are obligated to do some subsidy to some
organizations, but then there are others that just need to
pay. I mean, we're -- the taxpayers are funding, you know,
all the -- all the staff and the equipment and everything it
takes to run that thing out there, and it costs money to put
on any kind of an event, because there's setup time and
there's tear-down time and there's cleaning and all that sort
of stuff to do. And it just -- it can't be free to anything,
to my mind, other than 4-H. It's -- it's just -- I don't
think it's fair. You know, if somebody wants to come out
there and set up the thing and take it down and do all of
that, that's another consideration, but that's probably not
going to happen very often. They expect for it to be set up
when they get there. And we have trash that's generated by
that thing, an unbelievable amount of trash that we have to
.pay for to be taken to the dump. And all the sweeping and
mopping and caring for that thing costs money, and it just
needs to be charged for accordingly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably one of the areas of a
big change is going to be on the deposit. Right now, for a
lot of events, I think it's like -- it's $150. Say you have
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
81
500 people out there at a party. They have -- okay, they can
clean it up and get their $150, or they can say, "You keep the
$150; see you later," and that's what they do. And who
wouldn't? I mean, who wants to -- for 150 bucks, they'd be
cleaning up that whole thing. It's a lot of work.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And so what's happening is that,
you know, yeah, there are people forfeiting that $150, but
we're having to spend $500 to clean up the dadgum thing. So,
I think that's going to stop, that type of thing.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I know of an event
that's coming up in -- I think it's -- I believe it is over --
let's see, the 25th or 26th of September, and that is the Hill
Country Telephone annual meeting. And at this moment, we
don't have the information on that booking to see what they're
paying for that facility. And that's a -- you know, that's a
co-op. It's a great organization, and it should probably get
some discount. But they're going to have 900 people there,
and they're going to have a meal, and so you can imagine what
kind of a trash detail that's going to create. And so, you
know, that's that stuff, in my opinion, that has got to be
paid for. We don't know at this moment, because we haven't
gotten the information from our booking agent, how much
they're being charged for that event, so we're hoping to get
that in the very near feature so we can kind of see where we
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
82
are. We have had some more income since January, and I can't
explain why, but the income is up out there by about 4,000
over all of last year, and we still have several months left
in this year. And the thing is booked -- I'm pretty sure it
was booked the last two weekends that I've seen. So, anyway,
we're going to get the information somehow or another in the
next few days to make more determinations.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bottom line is, Bruce and I are
working along with Ms. Hyde on getting all this stuff put
together, and we're about to -- at the point to come to the
recommendation, probably at our next meeting or the one after
that. Probably the next meeting, really.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It needs to be the next
meeting. There's no reason, I don't think, to delay it too
much.
JUDGE TINLEY: I appreciate the work of both of you
guys and Ms. Hyde in trying to assimilate all this information
together and get it in a cohesive state so that it's workable
and we've got a decent control over it. Anything else on that
particular item, gentlemen? Let's move to Item 13; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to add a web page link to
'' the Kerr County web site to inform employees of nonofficial
information, such as fundraisers, birthdays, and other
events, same to be posted and maintained by the Kerr. County
I.T. Department.
6-25-07
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
MS. HYDE: We've had several situations this year
where it's not official county business, but people have asked
to use our e-mail or use our web site. And so, in talking
with John and talking with some of y'all, it seems like it
would be easier to put something on the web site that is
unofficial; you have a page so that we can put things like the
links for Hill Country Veterans or the V.A., if they want to,
but we can also put on unofficial events for the county, if we
have a spaghetti supper or if it's somebody's birthday and
they're going to have a birthday party or, you know, just --
just unofficial things that people would like to get out there
that anyone can look at.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know about birthdays. I
don't -- but I think events, I don't have a problem with. But
I guess my question comes, who's -- who's updating this?
MR. TROLINGER: Brad Alford is doing the updating.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think if we're going to do
that, there's got to be some checks and balance.
MS. HYDE: Well, the person has to take it to their
elected official or department head. Their department head
then -- or elected official then turns it in to I.T. via
e-mail. E-mail can be approved or disapproved and sent to
Brad and put on the site.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to add -- add to
that. You may have some -- when you're talking about -- you
6-25-07
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
listed a few things. We have -- like, the Judge has a car
show or a military --
MS. HYDE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- thing that happens on the
courthouse square on weekends, and he approves it, 'cause
we've given him that authority to do that. And he feels like
he has it anyway. But -- that's the only jab of the day,
Judge. But somehow, between he and Jody, I think -- I mean, I
would like to know about those things.
MS. HYDE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ahead of time. And sometimes
I drive up here and there's this neat thing going on on the
courthouse square, and I don't know anything about it. And if
I'd have known, I may have taken a bath, you know, any number
of things, and participated in it. But to me, those things
are important. To me. To where, you know, hey, there's a car
show. There's a -- there's two or three times a year that the
-- there's a military something happen out here, and it's
those kinds of things that -- that I think that we need to put
forth an effort in attending. I don't know about the car
show, but the military stuff, I think that we need to attend,
but I don't know about it.
MS. HYDE: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And those kind of things need
to be on the web site, in my opinion. Now, we can throw rocks
6-25-07
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
at Jody, I guess, for not doing that. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is -- I mean, I don't have a
problem with doing this. I don't think we need a court order
to do this. I think -- but I'd like to -- whoever's updating
it, tracking it -- and I haven't talked to Jody about it, but
I'm wondering if Jody could be -- could learn how to update
some of this, rather than having to use Brad. Let Brad be
fixing things. Just a thought. I see an awful lot of e-mails
about I.T. issues; just leave it at that. So, I hate to be
stretching our I.T. resources any thinner than they already
are by something that's really not critical.
JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect they can eventually get
that worked out if it's something that she can do, figure out
a way to transition it to her. If it's not, we'll just leave
it with Brad for now.
MR. TROLINGER: It sounds like a great idea to
distribute the input capability, but it really needs to be
centralized in order to stop it from getting out of control.
The -- the chain of command, so to speak, or the -- the
sign-offs need to go through a specified path and end up with
a -- with one person, I believe, in order to keep control over
it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we have to have --
MR. TROLINGER: Brad's got good judgment about those
things, and knows who to talk to.
6-25-07
86
1
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: We normally update the web page about
three to four days a week, anyway. We're constantly doing
something on it. And I think once we get the foundations set
up, the initial, I don't think it will be that big of a deal.
Right then, if it does become a burden, then maybe we can look
at training Jody on the software and stuff like that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good idea; I
think it's a good public service. I just -- we just need to
figure out a little bit as to how to do it. Sheriff, you have
a question?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, there is an I.T. policy
for the county on computer usage and that. If they just want
to update that policy to state whatever the policy would be on
-- on the chain and funneling that, I think it would help with
departments.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm a little confused on the
chain issue. I mean, when you mention that, I would think --
I'll use Little League. Say Little League wants to have their
registration dates on there. It shouldn't have to come
through a county person to do that; it should come from Little
League to do it. A county person needs to be a designated
person that they can contact. I mean, you know, we --
otherwise, it's going to be -- if you're not affiliated with
an organization -- or an event isn't affiliated with the
county somewhere, you won't ever get it. The idea is to get
6-25-07
87
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that kind of public service information out to the public.
	MS. HYDE: Well, then they can e-	mail or contact
Jody,	who could start the chain.		
	MR. ALFORD: That's what -- I was	wondering	the same
thing.	If y'all -- the Judge signs off on	something,	you
just -	- Jody can drop me a copy of it, and	that way I'	ll have
the ri	ght language and everything else, and	we can go	on with
it.			
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that -- however it gets
done, I think Jody is a good, logical person to funnel through
so I.T. isn't getting all these calls. 'Cause I definitely
don't want it going through I.T. Not that I want them going
through Jody either, but I think they can be screened there a
little bit, because something like the Little League thing, I
mean, that doesn't need to be approved by -- we don't need to
have a policy that getting that on the web site link needs to
be approved by someone on this Court. That just needs to be
done, and give her the discretion to kind of look at that, and
if she has a question, maybe she can contact the Judge or one
of us.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would it be appropriate for Ms. Hyde
to maybe work up a policy change or amendment to our I.T.
policy to reflect this?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: By our next meeting?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I don't think there's any --
6-25-07
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
any big rush on it. But --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I think it's
appropriate for John to do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. TROLINGER: Well, if you look at it, this is an
electronic version of the glass cases that we have out in the
hall and outside the courthouse.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MR. TROLINGER: So, what is the procedure or policy
to handle posting of those? I felt it would be the same basic
concept.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We don't know where that
information comes from. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: You had a comment?
i MR. EMERSON: Well, I think John just hit on it, but
I just wanted to make sure that the Court takes into account
the fact that you need some kind of policy on the posting.
Otherwise, there's nothing to keep Buster from selling his
Avon on there or, you know, somebody else publish a
disparaging comment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's why I think we need to
have a policy, and then give the policy to whoever we
designate to kind of -- the stuff flows through, and if
there's a question, that comes to the Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: You can handle that?
6-25-07
1
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
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
MR. TROLINGER: But do we agree that it's a posting
policy? It's not necessarily an Information Technology
policy; it's a posting --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, posting policy.
MR. TROLINGER: Be glad to help with it. It can be
inserted in the Information Technology policy, but --
JUDGE TINLEY: We understand you're dodging, John,
~I and that's okay. That's the reason I suggested that --
MS. HYDE: I'll have a posting policy for the next
~ meeting.
MR. TROLINGER: Or the one after. No rush.
MS. HYDE: Along with the policy and procedures.
MR. TROLINGER: Should be no different from someone
wanting to come in and throw some flyers on y'all's desk.
MS. HYDE: But you did bring up a good point. We
could have people that want to sell their Avon, or they're
going to have a -- you know, other things that we wouldn't
imagine that they'd want to use it for, but then they would.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or a rally that we don't think
is appropriate.
MS. HYDE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Or a garage sale.
MS. HYDE: Absolutely. So -- okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And, for the record, I do not
6-25-07
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
sell Avon.
JUDGE TINLEY: What do you sell?
MS. HYDE: Polo?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Confidential information.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Are we through with that one?
What's the pleasure of the Court on Item 14? Would you rather
go ahead and complete the other portions of the agenda and
come back to 14?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me go ahead and call 14;
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to obtain
repayment from former employee of overpayment of wages. Any
member of the Court have anything to offer in open or public
session with regard to that item at this time? Okay, we'll
come back to it in executive. Let's go to Section IV, which
is the approval agenda. Number one, payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to pay the
bills. Any question or discussion? Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: $3,500 for vehicle repair. What in
the world happened to that one? Or is that more than one?
Krauss Garage.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's their monthly bill.
6-25-07
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
That's going to be more than one.
MR. TOMLINSON: Who's it payable to? It's more than
i one .
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's more than one.
JUDGE TINLEY: Whole series of them.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's going to be oil changes
and everything, some minor repairs.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Alternators went out, things
I like that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other question or comment?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.}
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget Amendment
Request Number 1. That should read Juvenile Detention, as
opposed to Juvenile Probation, shouldn't it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Huh?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That sure changes my
questions.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is Probation doing
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
92
buying a bunch of food?
MR. TOMLINSON: This is -- I brought this to you
last meeting, and I didn't have all the details. So -- but
this is a request from Kevin Stanton, basically, to realign
his -- the amounts in his line items to -- to reflect what's
actually happening in his operations for the rest of the year.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. TOMLINSON: Do you want me to read these off?
Or --
JUDGE TINLEY: Any member of the Court want each one
of them read individually?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. I'll move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just one quick question,
Tommy. On the utility issue, we budgeted with both buildings
going, and now we have one shut down, and so we have some --
MR. TOMLINSON: That's -- this was the first year
that we had a budget for only one facility, so that made a
huge difference in these operations.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other 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.
6-25-07
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
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries.
MR. TOMLINSON: I would add that that -- that the
operations net-net for that operation is much better than we
anticipated.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Good to hear.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good. Now he's going to
want a raise. (Laughter.}
JUDGE TINLEY: Budget Amendment Request Number 2.
MR. TOMLINSON: Number 2 is for the County Jail, to
transfer $6,313.43 in Jailer Salaries, with 105.93 to Employee
Medical Exams, 1,063.66 to Operating Supplies, and 5,143.84 to
Prisoner Medical.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 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. Budget
Amendment Request 3.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Three is for the
Commissioners Court, Nondepartmental, to transfer $1,350 from
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
94
the Independent Audit line item to Notices. And I do have a
late bill, cash payable to Kerrville Daily Times for $286.20.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. Independent audit?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is the firm that we hire
to do the annual audit?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we have paid them?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we have 1,350 -- at least
1,350 left over?
MR. TOMLINSON: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How did they -- how did we
save money on that deal?
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, we -- we had to anticipate
what the cost would be, and it just came in under what we
budgeted.
I COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's very interesting.
MR. TOMLINSON: We don't have an exact number from
them, because at the beginning, we don't know how much time
they're going to have to spend on the single audit, and so it
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
95
just -- the amount of time they spent was reduced.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. I think the
letter of engagement indicated a cost not to exceed 25,000,
wasn't it? And it just came in under?
MR. TOMLINSON: I think it was 28,000, because we
paid -- let's see. Juvenile Probation pays part of it and
Adult Probation pays part of it, so we -- we charged all of
their share that was budgeted to pay --
JUDGE TINLEY: So we got the excess?
MR. TOMLINSON: Yeah, we got it, right.
JUDGE TINLEY: You like that better, Buster?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, sort of.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
THE CLERK: We have a motion and second.
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request Number 4.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Four is for the 198th
District Court and County Jail, to transfer -- don't cry now,
Rusty -- $3,716.50, with $2,663.50 to Court-Appointed
6-25-07
96
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Attorneys and $980 to Civil Court-Appointed Attorney line
item, and $73 to Court Transcripts.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 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: Motion does carry. Budget Amendment
Request 5.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay. Five is for the 216th
District Court, to transfer $7,916.88 from Jailer Salaries,
$125.58 to Office Supplies, $348.50 to Court-Appointed
Services, and $7,440.95 to Court-Appointed Attorney, and $1.85
to Civil Court-Appointed Attorney line item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: May I make one comment?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thanks, Bruce. We don't have
that many openings any more, and I do have some medical bills
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
97
coming that are going to be horrendous. We've had some
inmates spend over a week in ICU, things like that. So, just
for preparation.
JUDGE TINLEY: What's the -- what's the procedure
about putting them on bond?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: When it's a T.D.C. blue
warrant, and not a local warrant, you can't. We're stuck.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. Any other questions
or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Budget
Amendment Request 6.
MR. TOMLINSON: Well, 6 is for Constable, Precinct
1. This is actually to increase the budget by $50.05, and to
recognize a contribution for the purpose of his office.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just want to point out, this
happens kind of on a regular basis. I wonder if it's the same
~ person donating.
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
98
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All
in favor, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Budget Amendment
Request 7.
MR. TOMLINSON: Okay, 7 is for the County Treasurer.
She's requesting a transfer of $100 from the FICA line item,
$204 from her Retirement, $50 from Bond line item, and $243.35
from Postage. She wants to transfer $104 to Group Insurance,
$300 to Office Supplies, $135 to Conferences, and $58.35 to
Software Maintenance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Any question or discussion? I like her comment,
"Guesstimated expense through 9-30-07." Any other comments?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we have
I any more budget amendments?
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
99
MR. TOMLINSON: No, that's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any late bills?
MR. TOMLINSON: None.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly
reports from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4, District Clerk,
Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, County Clerk, both General
and Trust Funds, Constable, Precinct 3, Racial Profiling
Reports for 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, and Road and Bridge
Department. Do I hear a motion to approve these reports as
presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 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.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any reports from any of
the Commissioners in connection with their committee or
liaison assignments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Buster 1's asleep -- or
Commissioner 1.
6-25-07
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
100
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Barbecue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Barbecue. Just a reminder that
there's a reception in honor of Dr. Davis, who's going off the
Airport Board, this Thursday at 5:15 at the airport terminal.
Everyone`s invited to attend that. I believe he was --
maybe 19 years, something like that, some incredible amount of
time he's been on either the advisory board or the permanent
board. He's been a big asset. And I think that's it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I had a Library Board
meeting last week, and it seems like the budget's still going
to be proposed to be unchanged for the current year -- or
upcoming year. Environmental Health, I think we've been
dealing with them on a regular basis, trying to sort out
office procedures and various things that they need to --
needed help on. I've met with them, and Ms. Hyde and I and
have both met with them on occasion. Been out to the Ag Barn.
Jonathan and I met the other day with Roy Walston and Bob --
what's Bob's name? -- Bob Cook on starting the process and
actually getting the project done, creating the space, and
improving the space for -- for 4-H projects. For kids that
don't have a place to raise animals. There was some caution
that there were funds coming from private sources to -- to
fund most, if not all, of that first phase. And we kind of
decided where the thing was going to be divided off and how it
was going to be divided and what kind of materials, and we're
6-25-07
1
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
going to do a lot of it with donated labor and donated money.
I think it's going to be positive. Roy's looking forward to
having the facility. And Bobby Balser was even there; met
with him. You missed that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I missed that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You missed that one. I was in
on that one; I wasn't in on the other one. But, anyway,
that's the update on that particular thing. I guess that's
about all I have to report.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any reports from any
elected officials or department heads? Okay. Unless any
member of the Court's got something else, it appears we're
ready to move to Item 14 in executive session. Ready to go?
We're going out of public or open session at 11:31.
(The open session was closed at 11:31 a.m., and an
executive session was held, the transcript of which
is contained in a separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we are back in open or public
session at 11:39. Does any member of the Court have anything
to offer in connection with matters discussed in closed or
executive session?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion that we
authorize the County Attorney to pursue collection of funds
that were overpaid to a former employee.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
6-25-07
1
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
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Any further question or discussion on that motion?
Yes?
MR. EMERSON: Does the collection authorization
include litigation, if necessary?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, it does.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
I hand .
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Anything
else to come before the Court this morning, gentlemen? We
will stand adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:40 a.m.)
6-25-07
1
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
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 29th day of
June, 2007.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
B Y : __ _ _ E~~ ____ ____ _
Kathy nik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
6-25-07
ORDER NO. 30335
KERR COUNTY REVISIONS OF PLAT AND ROUTING PROCESS
CONCERNING ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Amend the Routing Slip to add a box under Section 3 saying that the "Permit and
fee are not required".
ORDER NO. 30336
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PLAT REVIEW PROCESS
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 that:
There will be no fee or application required whenever a lot line is removed
between two or more lots or if there is a minor revision to a plat, and the minor
revision is subjective, and determined by the Environmental Health Department.
ORDER NO. 30337
PROPOSED AGREEMENT TO HOUSE JUVENILES FROM CAMERON
COUNTY
Came to be heard this the .25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioners Letz. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Make space available to Cameron County in the event of a disaster, to house
juveniles, providing there is space available and that they provide staffing to
handle the children that are placed here, and pay all expenses incurred.
ORDER NO. 3 03 3 8
KERB COUNTY RAINWATER HARVESTING PROGRAM
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Rescind Court Order No. 27352 dated December 10, 2001, relating to a tax credit
for Rain Water Harvesting.
ORDER NO. 30339
AMISH COUNTRY GAZEBO
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Accept the gift from Mr. Gene Lehman of a 12 foot Pagoda Gazebo.
ORDER NO. 30340
USE OF KERR COUNTY PROPERTY ADJACENT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT
CENTER BY CITY OF KERRVILLE
Caine to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Authorize Commissioners Baldwin and Letz to meet with the City Council to offer
a plan to build a new Police Station on County Property.
ORDER NO. 30341
APPOINTMENT OF RAY GARCIA TO KERR COUNTY CHILD SERVICE
BOARD
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Appoint Ray Garcia as a member of the Kerr County Child Service Board.
ORDER NO. 30342
RESIGNATION OF BRUCE BAKER FROM LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Accept the resignation of Bruce Baker from the Library Advisory Board.
ORDER NO. 30343
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, carne to be considered by the
Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	130,677.94
15-Road & Bridge	$	35,444.87
18-County Law Library	$	4,097.63
41-Records Archival	$	43,750.00
50-Indigent Health Care	$	37,076.51
76-Juv Detention Facility	$	5,304.15
TOTAL
$ 256,351.10
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz,
the Court unanimously approved by vote of 3-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts.
ORDER NO. 3 0 3 44
BUDGET AMENDMENT # 1
JUVENILE DETENTION
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a Ynotion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to transfer the following expense codes:
Amendment
Expense Code Description Increase/()Decrease
76-572-107	Part-Time Staff +	$5,500.00
76-572-331	Vehicle Transportation +	$4,060.00
76-572-332	Food +	$12,000.00
76-572-334	Resident Supplies +	34,(7f~0.0~}
76-572-420	Telephone +	$4,940.00
76-572-108	Overtime -	($2,500.00)
76-572-203	Retirement -	($2,000.00)
76-572-333	Resident Medical -	($6,000.00)
76-572-351	Kitchen Supplies -	($600.00)
76-572-430	Publications -	($400.00)
76-572-440	Utilities -	($17,500.00)
76-572-487	Training -	($1,500.00)
ORDER NO. 30345
BUDGET AMENDMENT #2
COUNTY JAIL
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to transfer the following expense codes:
Amendment
Expense Code Description Increase/()Decrease
10-512-220	Employee Medical Exams +	$105.93
10-512-331	Operating Supplies +	$1,063.66
10-512-333	Prisoner Medical +	$5,143.84
10-512-104	Jailer Salaries -	{$6,313.43)
ORDER NO. 30346
BUDGET AMENDMENT #3
COMMISSIONERS' COURT
NON-DEPARTMENTAL
Caine to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Lenz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to issue a hand check in the amount of $286.20 to the
Kerrville Daily Times for 5/07 Ads for Employees and transfer the following
expense codes:
Expense Code Description
10-401-430 Notices
10-409-400 Independent Audit
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $1,350.00
- ($1,350.00)
ORDER NO. 30347
BUDGET AMENDMENT #4
198th DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY JAIL
Caine to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to transfer the following expense codes:
Expense Code Description
10-436-402	Court Appointed Attorney
10-436-403	Civil Court Appointed Atty
10-436-497	Court Transcript
10-512-104	Jailer Salaries
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $2,663.50
+ $980.00
+ $73.00
- (33,71t3.50j
ORDER NO. 30348
BUDGET AMENDMENT #5
216th DISTRICT GOUR~I`
COUNTY JAIL
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to transfer the following expense codes:
Amendment
Expense Code Description Increase/()Decrease
10-435-310	Office Supplies +	$125.58
10-435-401	Court Appointed Services +	$348.50
10-435-402	Court Appointed Attorney +	$7,440.95
10-435-403	Civil Court Appointed Atty +	$1.8~
10-512-104	Jailer Salaries -	($7,916.88)
ORDER NO. 30349
BUDGET AMENDMENT #6
GENERAL FUND
CONSTABLE PCT. # 1
Caine to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Lett, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to transfer the following expense codes:
Expense Code Description
10-370-300 Various Refunds
10-551-499 Miscellaneous
Amendment
Increase/()Decrease
+ $50.05"
+ $50.05"
'~-To recognize donation funds received to be utilized by Constable Pct. #1 in his
budget.
ORDER NO. 30350
BUDGET AMENDMENT #7
COUNTY TREASURER
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously
approved by vote o~ 3-0-0 to transfer the following expense codes:
Amendment
Expense Code Description Increase/()Decrease
10-497-202	Group Insurance +	$104.00
10-497-310	Office Supplies +	$300.00
10-497-485	Conferences +	$135.00
10-497-563	Software Maintenance +	$58.35
10-497-201	FICA -	($100.00)
10-497-203	Retirement -	($204.00
10-497-206	Bonds -	($50.00)
10-497-309	Postage -	($243.35)
ORDER NO. 30351
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 the following monthly reports:
District Clerk -March and April, 2007
JP #3
County Clerk -General and. Trust Fund
Constable Pct. #3 Racial Profiling Reports for 2003, 2004, 2005 & 2006
Road & Bridge Department
ORDER NO. 30352
OVERPAYMENT OF WAGES TO FORMER EMPLOYEE
Came to be heard this the 25th day of June, 2007, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 3-0-0 to:
Authorize the County Attorney to pursue collection of funds that were overpaid to
a former employee, including litigation if necessary.