1 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, October 22, 2007 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H.A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4 `" •O d 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 I N D E X October 22, 2007 PAGE --- Commissioners' Comments 5 1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to adopt Proclamation or Resolution in support of veterans and Veteran's Day 2007, as requested by Kerrville American Legion Post 208 11 1.2 Consider/discuss, adopt 2007-2008 Kerr County Community Plan for submission to Alamo Area Council of Governments 16 1.3 Open sealed bids for Kerr County 4-H Livestock Project Center 22 1.4 Consider/discuss, approve appointment of election judges and alternates for term of one year in accordance with the Texas Election Code 24 1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to adopt Kerr County Employees Health Benefits Plan for 2008 25 1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to consolidate cellular telephone contracts into a single account; authorize County Judge to sign 47 l.ll Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on request from Kerrville Christmas Lighting Corp- oration to participate in or otherwise assist in cost of electrical upgrades at courthouse 55 1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to up- date broadband Internet services agreement with Time Warner Cable; authorize County Judge to sign 61 1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for re- vision of plat, Lot 67 of Cypress Springs Estates, Phase 2, Section One; set public hearing for same 63 1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to amend Court Order #30504 to use Fund 20 to purchase used excavator 65 1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to accept petition to vacate and discontinue road for part of Upper Turtle Creek Road, and posting of same 67 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I N D E X (Continued) October 22, 2007 1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on issues related to the Airport Board 1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to honor request from Texas Association for Home Care to declare November 2007 as home care and hospice month in Kerr County 1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve contracts with Kerr Economic Development Foundation, Big Brothers and Sisters, K'Star, Divide VFD, Mountain Home VFD, Center Point VFD, Hunt VFD, Comfort VFD, Elm Pass VFD, Ingram VFD, Castle Lake VFD, and Tierra Linda VFD; allow County Judge to sign same 1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to authorize the draining of Ingram Lake 1.16 Set date and time for a workshop on long-range planning, improvements, maintenance, etc., for county parks 1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to set public hearing for revision of Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations 1.18 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to adopt a resolution regarding 2008 Kerr County Resolution for Indigent Defense Grant Program 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 5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads --- Adjourned PAGE 70 85 86 91 100 103 107 109 113 114 115 120 123 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 On Monday, October 22, 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 regular meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled for this date and time, Monday, October the 22nd, 2007, at 9 a.m. It is that time now. Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Please stand and join me in a moment of prayer, followed by the pledge. (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if there's any member of the audience that wishes to be heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item, feel free to come forward and tell us what's on your mind. If you wish to be heard on an agenda item, we'd ask that you fill out a participation form. They can be found at the rear of the room. It's not absolutely essential that you do that; however, by doing so, it alerts me that there is someone that wishes to be heard on an agenda item, and hopefully I won't miss you that way. But even if you don't fill out one of those forms, if you wish to be heard on an agenda item, if to-zz-o~ 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you'll get my attention in some fashion when we get to that item, I'll give you a reasonable opportunity to be heard. But right now, if there's anybody that wishes to be heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item, feel free to come forward at this time. Seeing no one coming forward, we'll move on. Commissioner Letz, what do you have for us this morning? COMMISSIONER LETZ: First, you know, if someone's trying to get his attention and throws something, make sure you err -- throw it that direction rather than this direction. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a couple things this morning. This chair is -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Must have short people sit in these things periodically. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The eastern part of the county had a loss of two very great leaders in that area in the past couple weeks. A former commissioner, Adolph Bartel, died, a commissioner for 24 years in Precinct 3. Those that didn't know him really missed a treasure of an individual. Probably one of the most mild-mannered, kind people you could ever meet. I talked to him frequently since I've been a commissioner. He was very helpful and supportive always, but just an absolutely fantastic person. One thing I didn't io-ZZ-o~ 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 realize until some of the services, he was also a very The other one was one burned down a little over a year ago. Very interesting guy. He was my brother's age, little bit older. I spent many of his death, a lot of the history and knowledge of Comfort also passed. So, two -- two sad events. Other things going on in the eastern part of the county, for those that haven't been through Comfort this time of year, or this year, there's a thing called Scarecrows in Comfort, and it's really grown in popularity, and almost every business in town puts up a scarecrow exhibit and there's competition. And I'm not sure who won, but it's fun to drive around town and see the scarecrows this time of year. There was an antique show this past weekend that was quite successful. Luckily, it got in before the rains came. And I think the final note, I had a call from Judge Schroeder on the way in this morning saying that the EMS issue in the eastern part of the county is on their agenda for approval 10-22-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 today, so this thing will probably be done after four or five years. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was going to guess three. It's longer than that? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Longer than that. I mean, I know Commissioner -- Bruce is in his second year now -- I think second year, and it predated him by three or four years. So, it's been on the -- anyway, looks like it's finally going to happen. That is all I have. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, we had the Mountain Home Volunteer Fire Department fish fry not this past weekend, but the one before, and -- and we need to plan a bit more for next year, because we had over double the crowd that we had the year before. We need to improve our serving lines and have more of them and more fish. And it's unbelievable how much -- how many people we had. Preliminary figures, somewhere around $12,000, I think, is what they raised. Unbelievable. That's about double what it was last year as well, with the double -- double crowd. But I think a good time was had mostly by all, and that -- big success. If it keeps growing, it will be a big asset to that fire department to hopefully get a new fire station built one of these days, if they can move forward. The other thing is, I did put the burn ban on last week. And all my fire departments called io-za-o~ 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 part of the county, and I don't think that's going to have much effect on that dry blue stuff sticking out about 2 feet tall everywhere. That's about it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will probably put the burn ban on probably, I'm guessing, Wednesday. It will go on this week, though, because of the -- now is the time of year the northers blow through and the winds get really gusty. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I will probably put mine -- I was planning on putting mine on this morning, as a matter of fact, until we had that heavy, heavy, heavy downpour of probably half a point of rain last night. But I wasn't going to -- I wasn't going to participate this morning, 'cause I'm so excited about being able to serve the great taxpayers of Kerr County, but these two, my colleagues down at the other end of the table, brought up food, one of my favorite topics, so I want to amen what Bruce was saying. The catfish -- you're really good at that. That is good catfish. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We have a good crew. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have a good crew. And the party at Mountain Home was excellent, and so I'm going to to-zz-o~ 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 start just following Bruce around wherever he goes so I can get good catfish. And I've been going through Buzzie's withdrawal because of his place not open, so I went to Comfort Saturday and ate at Buzzie's to kind of get that COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The original Buzzie's, that is correct. And, Judge, I know that is huge important information, and I wanted to the share it with the -- with you in particular. So, thank you for allowing me to do that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You forgot to tell them you were at Mamacita's for dinner the night before. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was at Mamacita's for to me, and a good time was had by all. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Looks like the fame of the Mountain Home Fire Department's fish fry preceded them westward, because I see now a big sign on Eddie Taylor's fence announcing a fish fry by the Center Point Volunteer Fire Department, and they have never done that before. So -- so we're going -- they're going to do something like that over there. But it was a good -- good event you had. I think I'll put the burn ban on also, but since it rained 2 and a half inches, I guess I'll wait a couple days till it dries out and then do it. io-zz-o~ 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 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Neither one of y'all said anything about Tivy football. Is that just kind of a dead subject? Or -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- you just forget? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, you beat somebody 44 to nothing, I mean, what is there to talk about? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 56 to 6, wasn't it? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, fine. That's even ~ worse. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Shows which part of the game you slept through. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I was just trying to be nice, and here you are going to take advantage of people and just hammer them. JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the Mountain Home event was truly a tremendous success, and, I mean, the line just never stopped. Someone made a comment to me, "It looks like they put up a detour sign in Dallas and directed them down here." They just kept coming. So, it was a -- it was a really great event. And, Commissioner, for your information, it's not just catfish. This man has talents of cooking anything. Until you have tried his pork tenderloin, and particularly beef tenderloin, you haven't lived. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. io-22-0~ 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 JUDGE TINLEY: And, yeah, just follow him around. Whatever he wants to cook, that's fine. We need -- we need COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't we open up a some, one of our United States Senators from Texas, John Cornyn, will be in town this coming Saturday. He will be speaking at a luncheon sponsored by the Kerr County Republican Women, and it's going to be out at the Inn of the Hills, so if any of you have an interest of -- of hearing what our U.S. Senator has to say, maybe expressing some of your concerns to him, that may be an opportunity. Let's get on with the business at hand. First item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to adopt a proclamation or resolution in support of veterans and Veterans Day 2007, as requested by the Kerrville American Legion Post 208. I put this on the agenda at the request of Mr. Larry Vetter, who is with us today, in support of the efforts that the local American Legion Post 208 is making with respect to veterans, particularly at the hospital, and some of the events they have going on there. If any of the members of the Court have any questions for Mr. Vetter, he's here available for you. io-22-0~ 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 __ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As a matter of fact, I wanted you to tell me about these pledges and this walk and fundraising issue. I see where you're planning on walking 200 or 300 miles -- 200 or 300 miles here. But I -- is this going to explain it to me? MR. VETTER: No, that's just that's for your ', signature and your pledge. (Laughter.) I~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- so you want me to II' pledge money for you? MR. VETTER: You can be the first of five. I'll collect it from Jody later. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know. I'm always the first in this room, pal. So, -- MR. VETTER: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- a pledge per-mile? MR. VETTER: Well, you can do that, or you can make a -- this is not -- this is just -- that's a side issue, that pledge sheet. But what we're doing -- for you it's a side issue. But -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. MR. VETTER: -- what we're doing -- what we're doing -- and I got to tell you, it is wonderful to be standing in front of you not on city government business. io-zz-o~ 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 This is really -- this is really nice. But -- and to still they -- as you probably know, they do not yet have a budget, and they're working on 95 percent of last year's budget, 'cause the federal government hasn't come down with any. But we've gone up to Robin Gutierrez and several other people at the V.A. Hospital and said, "What project would you like us to work on that you don't normally get money for?" And, so, the long-term care unit -- primarily, that is the last home that most of these old soldiers are going to have, and to make it less of a hospital environment and more of a home environment is a project that they really wanted to do. And we said, "Okay. Well, we think we can walk" -- first it was going to be to Bandera. Then the Highway Department said, "No, you're not going to walk to Bandera. Not only are you too old for that, but we don't want you out there. We don't want you out there. We got construction going on the highway in Bandera County." We said, "Okay. How about if we started at Wharton Road and stay off of 173 and 27." We'll go along the River Road through Center Point, and have three low-water crossings, and then come back the same way. Approximately 17 -- roughly six 3-mile legs. Y'all could almost put together io-zz-o~ 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a team here. All you need is one other person. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to put a pledge down for you. Count me out. MR. VETTER: And so -- ~' COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner Letz is a good walker. !~ MR. VETTER: And so we are -- we're looking for -- to raise money for this effort at the V.A. Hospital. And I don't know if you had any particular questions, I'm here to answer it. The commander sends his greetings to you. He can't be here today. And -- and I hope we're going to have fun. I hope it's not going to be like this. It's going to be on a Sunday, so we hopefully will avoid all the sand and gravel trucks on the road. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What time will it start? MR. VETTER: We're -- we're planning right now on starting at 9:00. We're trying to get back to the American Legion at about 3:00, so we're trying to time it when the kitchen is closing with bingo, and then we're going to have our own food. So, it's going to be about 9:00 to 3:00. JUDGE TINLEY: If Commissioner Baldwin would participate in that walk, I'd certainly be pledging -- MR. VETTER: Have a designated walker. JUDGE TINLEY: -- for him. Yeah, I think he'd be a wonderful walker. io-zz-o~ 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Rex, they estimate 23 miles. You can cover it in 7.6 hours. MR. EMERSON: I think the Sheriff's Department has a fitness program, so Rusty would be the more proper delegate. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does that mean the Sherltt is walking? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe we should talk about this after our health insurance talk. MR. LOONEY: Please don't. MR. VETTER: I did ask one of our city police department lieutenants to coordinate with the Sheriff on this. I don't know -- I haven't double-checked to see whether that happened. I wanted to also ask Mr. Odom whether we might be able to, on that Sunday, borrow some of those low-water crossing signs and put "Idiots Out Walking Around -- Watch For Them" signs over them. JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any "Idiots Out Walking Around" signs, Leonard? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can make some. MR. ODOM: I'm sure -- if Larry will tell us what he needs, I'm sure, with authorization of the Court, we can do that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I move for approval of the resolution. io-22-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the resolution. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to Item 2. MR. VETTER: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Consider, discuss, and adopt the 2007-2008 Kerr County Community Plan for submission to the Alamo Area Council of Governments. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mr. Vetter? Got something for you here. MR. VETTER: Oh, really? Already. Wow, I'm impressed. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It made it around up here. MR. VETTER: I should pass this around. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's my 20. Hey, write "paid" on my part of that. MR. VETTER: Okay. Thank y'all. JUDGE TINLEY: You bet. MS. LAVENDER: You all have a copy of the almost to-zz-o~ 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 latest draft of it. There's a couple of changes in there that you might note if you want to keep up with this. On Page 9, Mr. Wendling over at the city police department requested that his phone number be changed to 739 rather than using the 792 number. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who? MS. LAVENDER: Page 9, Jeff Wendling, the chairman of the law enforcement. Just a minor little telephone change there. And the other one is on -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't see on it Page 9. MS. LAVENDER: Yeah, where it says -- JUDGE TINLEY: 10. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 10. MS. LAVENDER: 10? Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, what is he? MS. LAVENDER: He's the captain at the police department, and he was the chairman of the law enforcement. See, we break up in focus groups, and then each focus group produces their part of the plan and then sends it back to me, and then I do all the gathering of the statistics. It's not in those -- that part of it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 739 what? MS. LAVENDER: 739, the same last four numbers. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. MS. LAVENDER: And then on Page 14 -- to-zz-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait just a minute. MS. LAVENDER: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Go back to the criminal justice thing. We got a -- we got a memo this last week from the Police Chief -- I can't remember what the organization is. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was AACOG Criminal Justice, our representative. The county representative. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: County representative. MS. LAVENDER: We'll talk about that in just a second, Buster. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. No, I want to talk about it right now. MS. LAVENDER: Okay, talk about it right now. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the way I remember the letter from the Police Chief was, there's an opening. You have an opening, and we want to put our guy in, is the way I remembered it. Is this it? JUDGE TINLEY: No. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. We'll talk about that later. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is not it. MS. LAVENDER: Okay. On Page 14, under Proposed Objectives down at the bottom, Number 1, after K'Star, add io-zz-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 19 Hill Country CASA. We didn't get that in there in the original typing. About -- under Number 1 of the proposed objectives. JUDGE TINLEY: That's on Page 15. MS. LAVENDER: 15? Okay, sorry about that. Well, the copy I brought with me is the one that Ilse Bailey helped me correct the little things that were in it. I apologize. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where are we? MS. LAVENDER: Add Hill Country CASA in there after K'Star, because they do serve victims also. And that's the only two minor things. This plan is done on an annual basis by all the counties in the AACOG region, submitted, and then becomes the basis for our grant applications. The Victims Services Department is funded through an AACOG VOCA Grant. Hill Country Crisis Council and Kids Advocacy Place both have VOCA grants. The City of Kerrville, this coming year, has a grant that they submitted under the 421 plan. We also submitted a juvenile grant this year, and it was not approved. Juvenile money's very tight at the state level, II and even though we were recommended, the money ran out before they got to us in the -- in the ranking. And then we also i had a 421 grant for an S.R.O. officer in Ingram and it was not funded; it wasn't even close to the cutoff of the money. 'I So, this is just an annual thing that we do. I I COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is a prerequisite. io-22-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 MS. LAVENDER: It is a prerequisite for us to be able to -- to do the grants. And we are the first county that's finished ours. They told us we had to have them in by the 31st of October, and then they extended the deadline to November 15th because so many of the other counties had not even had their initial meetings. So, we jumped ahead, and -- and according to AACOG last week, when I talked to them, ours is probably going to be the first one that's finished, so that's good. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. And I think we're covered in here; I just wanted to make sure. Under the Homeland Security part, under the -- I'm reading on Page 29. MS. LAVENDER: Should be Page 28 for me. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Actually, Page 30. The top box, last couple sentences says, "In disasters, evacuation of people and their animals is a priority. As the country watched in the Katrina and Rita stories in 2005, people do not evacuate if they have to leave behind their beloved pets. Planning for that possibility is very important in Kerr County also because of the potential for floods and tornadoes." One of the things that I've been thinking about is -- is because Homeland Security funds the new, I guess, pool of money, is this language significant or inclusive enough for us to apply for that funding for a plan for out at Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center to get an additional area io-Za-o~ 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 where we can house people in evacuation situations? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And improve it so that you can house them? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Certainly worth a try. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I'm saying. I want to make sure that, you know, since we're working on that right now, that that language is inclusive enough. MS. LAVENDER: I think so. I think we've identified it as a -- as a priority, and then when the grant applications are posted, if we want to do that, I think as long as it's in there as a priority, we're good. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I mean, it's just to make -- cover the base. Who knows what things we'd need? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Might be some assistance there for -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Rosa, you did a good job on this. MS. LAVENDER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Any further question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. to-zz-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 22 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Ms. Lavender, thank you for all your hard work that you put in on this. We really appreciate it. Next item is to open sealed bids for Kerr County 4-H livestock project center. The bid is here. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You received one? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The bid? JUDGE TINLEY: The bid. One bid. It's titled on the outside, "Concrete and horse barn bid." COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pretty accurate. COMMISSIONER LETZ: While the Judge is opening it, that is because the bid came in slightly over 25,000 originally, so we had to go out through the whole bid process. We thought -- you know, so that's why we bid it. JUDGE TINLEY: We have a bid from Neal and Neal Concrete, poured concrete in horse born at Ag Barn, 25,360. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept the bid from -- Neal? JUDGE TINLEY: Neal and Neal. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Neal and Neal -- Concrete Company? 25 I JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. to-zz-o~ 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 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- in the amount of $25,360. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to accept the bid. Is your motion to actually approve the bid and award the work? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, it is. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. JUDGE TINLEY: Yes? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just refresh ou r memory. How much of the concrete are we doing out there? The entire -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Roy? MR. WALSTON: It's 8,700 square feet. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that the entire under-roof area? MR. WALSTON: No, it's two-thirds of it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two-thirds. It's the part that -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's close enough, Roy. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- portion that's going to be used by the 4-H, primarily. io-zz-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 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you. MR. WALSTON: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? MR. EMERSON: I hate to be a stick-in-the-mud, but the way the agenda item is worded, I don't know how you can award the contract. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good point. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You are a stick-in-the-mud. (Laughter.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's why you get the big I bucks . COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll put it on our next agenda to award the contract. JUDGE TINLEY: I guess we give this to Cheryl. Okay. Let's move quickly to Item 4; consider, discuss, and approve the appointment of election judges and alternates for the term of one year in accordance with the Texas Election Code, Section 32. MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, this is just a formality we have to go through. The county election board met this year and had made these recommendations, and so I need approval -- because this is a county election, I need approval from the io-zz-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 Commissioners Court for the early voting ballot board team and the central accumulator team. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who is the county elections I board? MS. PIEPER: It consists of the County Clerk, Voter Registrar's office, Sheriff, County Judge, both party chairs. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second for approval of the agenda item. 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 have a 9:30 timed item, that being Item 7. I will call that item. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to adopt the Kerr County employees' health benefits plan for 2008. Mr. Looney? MR. LOONEY: Morning, Judge. I had dinner at the Mexican food restaurant. I'm sorry, I was trying... (Laughter.) It was a long weekend. I had a long weekend as a result of trying to go through and make sure that we had io-zz-o~ 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 all the bids analyzed appropriately and -- and accurately, all the bids that came in. We had seven complete bids that administrator, so it's necessary for us to change. We went through seven bids. We looked at a lot of different items, and there's not one of them -- or all of them are potentially administration efficiently. There are -- each third-party administrator feels that they've got a certain advantage in the market, certain things that they do in the market that set themselves aside from everybody else, and it's not always in the numbers, the dollars and cents itself. It's more of a service issue, more of a -- that process. So, we go through this analysis -- spreadsheet analysis, and we come up with hard dollar numbers, but the end result really is what I feel, personally -- what I feel, as your consultant, is in the best interest of the county moving forward for 2008. As a result of all these circumstances, it would be easy for me to bring in front of you six disgruntled bidders because they didn't -- were not able to accept this contract or not able to be in this contract. However, we have to award one, and the award I'm to-z2-o~ 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 recommending is to Group and Pension Administrators out of COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say it again? MR. LOONEY: Group and Pension Administrators, Inc. all the bids, as a matter of fact. And I briefly discussed with Mr. Wallace my recommendation to determine if he was satisfied with that recommendation, and -- Don? So, you that experience and their history, that they would be a good asset. We are going to have to take a look at a master plan document that Group and Pension Administrators has to make sure that we contract with them appropriately and in relationship to the current -- current benefits, so we will be taking a look at that, making sure that their master contract carries forward the same basic coverage that is provided to the employees currently. Based on our funding, based on the recommendation, we will not have to change the contribution levels for employees. For their dependent care moving forward -- (Mr. Looney's cell phone rang.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the employee group. MS. VAN WINKLE: That's all, folks. to-zz-o~ 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 MR. LOONEY: Did you record that? (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good timing. MR. LOONEY: Sorry about that, guys. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Looney Tunes? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you really -- did you ~ plan that? MR. LOONEY: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's pretty slick. MR. LOONEY: If I had planned that, believe me, I would take full credit. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: These insurance salesmen are something, aren't they? Golly, to go through all that. ', COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Great. I MR. LOONEY: Where was I? JUDGE TINLEY: The other Looney Tunes. MR. LOONEY: The other Looney Tunes. The -- the other thing we have to look at moving forward in the plan design, things that we've discussed before, and that's the possibility of changing the waiting period for new employees. In discussion with Ms. Hyde, we've talked about the possibility of extending that by up to maybe 30 days, going to 60 days in employment, the first of the month following completion of that 60 days of employment. We'll take a harder look at that when we start working on the benefit plan design itself. We're looking at removing dependents' to-2z-o~ 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 pregnancies from the benefit program, and also changing the definition of a dependent to require a dependent to be in a -- a college or trade school or something of a higher education level between the ages of 19 and 23, so that those dependents are truly dependents. We've got the -- as a new administrator, we'll be required for an enrollment process to identify all current dependents covered, so that we're assured that any dependent that is listed under the health care plan is truly a dependent of your employee. We have a life insurance contract that's in effect with Mutual of Omaha that is not going out of effect. They have -- they will have one more year at the current rate, so we do not have to change the life insurance contract. The -- again, the -- you know, they're qualified bidders. They're all qualified. My recommendation is Group and Pension Administrators for your administration for 2008, with two one-year contracts for renewal. The contracts -- the bids that they've provided have guaranteed the administrative rates for up to three years with no change, so that's -- we -- we can only contract for the one year, but offer two-year renewal based on their performance under the contract. JUDGE TINLEY: And, here again, the numbers are within what we've budgeted for the current -- MR. LOONEY: Yes, sir. io-22-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 JUDGE TINLEY: -- year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mr. Looney, just prior to the meeting, you mentioned to me a letter that I expected to be in here, 'cause you said the Court received it. Can I see that letter? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here. It may be in your I box . COMMISSIONER LETZ: It could be. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's where mine was. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, last place to look. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: With respect to the letter, Gary, I've got a couple of questions about this Entrust issue letter that we had received, just a couple simple questions I think that you can probably answer. One of them is in your last -- the last time you were here, two weeks ago, you used the words "serious plan design issues." And I'm assuming that you were -- pointed that at Entrust, that they were -- that they were the ones that had serious plan design issues, because they didn't make the cut. MR. LOONEY: Well, no, they did -- they did make the cut. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- and so I wanted you to talk just a minute about that, just a short thing. I mean, I can catch it pretty quick. I want to talk about that, and then this issue of the bidding laws, Local io-22-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 31 Government Code, Chapter 262 and 252, those -- those two MR. LOONEY: Okay. The serious -- the serious bid presentation, and the -- and the bid issue that I had was in the optional bids that they had offered under a -- under various different plan designs that they had represented in their bid, and that represented that plan design change in relationship to the overall cost that was associated with that. So, the notes there were my notes as a -- my work progress notes showing that the bids that were in the -- the listing that was there were based on a complete takeover in the current plan document, but that the numbers that were associated with the other plan that they had offered, I had some serious issues with because of the plan design. So, what's in the spreadsheet was a duplicate takeover process. That's why I didn't put the other numbers in that, because it wasn't equivalent to the other plan design issues. Under the bid specification for counties and municipalities, there used to be a regulation that required everything to be made on a proposal basis, which means that it didn't leave any room for negotiation; that whatever was bid was bid. That it was a sealed bid process, and you write the RFP in a manner that gives us the right to negotiate for io-az-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 32 numbers, and that I would give that piece back to the bidder to allow them to make corrections, adjustments, make sure it was accurate. Of all the bids that came in, of all seven of it's very hard to pull one number or two numbers or three numbers out of them, because of the way they have all been presented. Plus, then you have to consider what is represented by those admin numbers, because they vary. It's like some plans will include X, Y, and Z; some only include X and Y. You have to pay an extra fee for that, and so on. So, there's a lot of that jumbling that goes on. So, trying to put a hard dollar number for that particular item is difficult. You know, that's why -- you know, that's why you pay me the big bucks. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Well, I guess my question is, I just -- I feel like I've been here so long that, you know, this bidding and opening bids and looking at numbers and tinkering with the numbers as you go along has always been kind of a no-no around here. Not necessarily 10-22-0~ 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 with insurance, but other things, and -- that we bid a lot I ', on. I was just uncomfortable with that, with the fact that you can open the bids -- even though you hide the names. I understand that, and that's probably wise. But you -- you open the bids and then negotiate on those numbers. That just doesn't make any sense to me. But it's just -- MR. LOONEY: Common practice. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, in the insurance business. MR. LOONEY: In the insurance business. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We don't do that with tractors and stuff like that. MR. LOONEY: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, that's what I'm saying. I'm just kind of -- I have -- MR. LOONEY: If it were -- if it were a tractor, it ', would make my job a whole lot easier. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. LOONEY: But -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me follow up on Commissioner Baldwin's -- one of his questions. We have a communication from Entrust, which he cites a meeting -- the ',, letter cites a meeting that I assume took place with you, or at least some representative? MR. LOONEY: On Friday. io-z2-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 34 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that correct? And going back to the -- to the workshop document that you gave us, even though the -- the submittals weren't identified by corporate names or company name, the one that's entitled -- or the one that has a notation, "serious plan design issues," it's pretty easy to determine, from having received this letter, that that's probably -- MR. LOONEY: That's probably who it is. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That probably fits, doesn't it? MR. LOONEY: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: My question is, at that meeting, were those serious design -- plan design issues -- MR. LOONEY: I just discussed -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- rectified? MR. LOONEY: I discussed it with their representative and told him exactly why I put that notation there, just as I explained to Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They were reconciled or rectified or identified? MR. LOONEY: Whether he accepted my, you know, response or not, I don't know. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see. MR. LOONEY: Commissioner, it's simply that I told him that those were my notes; that it was a workshop note, to-zz-a~ 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and I put it in there because of the alternate plans that had been offered, and the numbers that were in the spreadsheet were based on the current plan design. ~' COMMISSIONER LETZ: Go ahead. JUDGE TINLEY: The -- after we had our workshop and -- and these were just merely identified by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, whatever they were, you indicated that you were still digesting the numbers and refining, and I believe you just indicated that you forwarded a copy of that spreadsheet to every single one of the bidders? MR. LOONEY: They had a copy of the spreadsheet that identified their bid. JUDGE TINLEY: And I believe you indicated at our workshop that you were going to do that to make sure that you were properly representing what their bid was and to verify ~~ that with them? MR. LOONEY: That's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: And did they all receive it? MR. LOONEY: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: I assume you got some responses that indicated that, no, this wasn't exactly right, or no, they didn't mean this, they meant something else? MR. LOONEY: I would like to tell you that I'm infallible, but unfortunately, I have to make sure that what I'm representing is what they feel is best represented. io-22-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 36 Yeah, that's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: They all had that opportunity, and I those that wished to avail themselves did? MR. LOONEY: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My -- JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Wallace, you had a question? MR. WALLACE: Gary sent that to me, and I forwarded each individual spreadsheet to each of the seven potential I! bidders that I got the bid from. I got responses back and forwarded those on to Gary. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. WALLACE: I don't remember if all seven of them responded or not, but I got a lot of responses. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question is really more on the process issue. And I'm -- I trust that you did -- you know bid laws and are following bid laws, but I don't rely on you for that information; I rely on the County Attorney. And I hate to give Rex something to do, but, you know, it's critical to me that we follow bid laws, because it is different, evidently, than any other kind of bidding that we do. And it seems a little -- I'm kind of -- I was thinking as Commissioner Baldwin was talking, and I'm -- it's hard to figure out why we bid insurance, if we do bids and then io-22-0~ 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 negotiate with all of them, I guess. You know, I mean, so anyway, my question to the County Attorney is, are we -- are you comfortable that all bid laws were followed? MR. EMERSON: Frankly, I don't know the procedures that Mr. Looney followed, because he handled that independently as a representative of this Court. But I can tell you under Chapter 262.030, the Local Government Code, Subsection (e), it says, "As provided in the request for proposals and under rules adopted by the Commissioners Court, discussions may be conducted with responsible offerors who submit proposals determined to be reasonably susceptible of being selected for award. Offerors must be accorded fair and equal treatment with respect to any opportunity for discussion and revision of proposals, and revisions may be permitted after submission and before award for the purpose of obtaining best and final offers." COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- MR. EMERSON: So I'm assuming that's the subparagraph that Mr. Looney was dealing with all the bidders on. MR. LOONEY: That's correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that -- the letter -- and I read it pretty quickly -- says that that didn't take place -- alleges that it didn't take place. So, I mean, you know, that's a -- that's an important thing that needs to be io-ZZ-o~ 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 -_ resolved, in my mind. I mean, I don't know -- you know, I don't know how we do that for something done outside our office. But if a -- if the -- the statement from Entrust is that -- part of the statement is that they were not given the same, I guess, benefit as the other ones, or same negotiation protocol, whatever words they were using. JUDGE TINLEY: As I understand the process, ail Commissioner, that the County Attorney just referred to, once the bids are received, they're then reviewed to see who of these bidders might ultimately be in the ballpark as being a successful bidder. Any of them that are not in the ballpark are winnowed out, and then those that remain, us, through Mr. Looney, is authorized to go to them to negotiate for the final and best offer. And that, I think, is what -- did you give every single one of those bidders an opportunity -- MR. LOONEY: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: -- to -- MR. LOONEY: Yes, we did. And, Commissioner Letz, on Friday, Mr. Wallace arranged for a representative of the Entrust people to come to my office. I met with him for about an hour, and asked at that time if they had any additional changes and updates, and anything that they wished to prepare or propose to the County at that point. I think that they'd even made arrangements at one point to come by and visit with the Judge during this process. They've also io-zz-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 39 contacted Ms. Hyde on a couple of occasions to discuss the process. So, of all of the individuals that were involved in the process, they were more actively involved in it than the majority of the rest of them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Was the -- and I know it's -- there are a lot of other things other than price that are in your -- why you're recommending Group and Pension Administrators. Where do they rank on this pure cost? Were they the lowest or the highest., or -- MR. LOONEY: On their maximum aggregate cost? They were the lowest bidder in that. They were -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: What about on the -- what about the -- MR. LOONEY: Fixed cost? COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- the fixed cost, so to speak? MR. LOONEY: They were second and third -- or second or third. But, again, that has a lot to do with services that are rendered in relationship to that fixed cost, and that's why it's difficult. If you rank the total amount of services that are involved with the cost, then that's why we're making the recommendation. It's the volume of the service in relationship to the overall cost. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It sounds to me like that they didn't peddle any bids like what this letter would indicate. Each bidder got their own package back to make io-zz-o~ 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 sure that they had done everything correctly. They didn't get the spreadsheet of all the bids so they could go and compare one to the other. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what it sounds like to me, too. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And that, to me, would be proper, as long as you don't give another competitor a bid to go and pick apart and try to figure out a way to outbid that person. That's not fair. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that spreadsheet was public. Any -- every one of them could have it. MR. LOONEY: It was public information after the workshop. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But it didn't have any names. COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. MR. LOONEY: No. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You only had numbers. And that's -- you know, that, to me -- you know, they might guess who the other bidders are, but they would -- you know, it's public record, but it's not the same thing as -- as peddling bids with names. MR. LOONEY: The goal and the purpose of the process is to get the best cost and best service for the county. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. io-zz-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 41 MR. LOONEY: You know, I have no interest in the flow of commission dollars or anything else that has anything to do with it. My job is to bring to you what I feel is the best contract. And it's not a tractor, Commissioner Baldwin. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's not tractors. MR. LOONEY: It's not a tractor. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that. JUDGE TINLEY: We've got a gentleman in the back of the room that's got a question. If you'll identify yourself and give your address, please. MR. JACOBSON: I'm David Jacobson; I'm with Entrust. And just to go on with the Texas Local Government Code, what it states is, if provided in the request for proposals, proposals shall be opened and in a manner that avoids disclosure of the contents to competing offerors and keeps the proposal secret during the negotiations. All proposers -- all proposals are open for public inspection after the contract is awarded, but trade secrets and confidential information in the proposals are not open for public inspection. And, actually, the RFP cited Texas Local Government Code 252, but 252, which is for municipalities, i and 262 for counties, are a little bit -- they're pretty -- they're pretty identical. It goes on to say in the county chapter that once the bid is selected, the final bid, if negotiations with that vendor are not -- are not -- it to-zz-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 42 doesn't feel like the Court is getting what they ask for, then they go on to the second bidder. And, basically, what our concerns were -- they were twofold. One, I did an evaluation of the spreadsheet I was presented on October 8th, because we did get a copy of the full sheet. We were unwilling to change our numbers, because we felt that would disqualify our bid after the fact if we changed our numbers after we had the public information. It doesn't matter if the names are withheld. The numbers and second concern that we had is if -- besides having the lowest cost, on October 8th, from a service standpoint, Mr. Looney did warrant us a meeting, and in that meeting on Friday, he allowed us 25 minutes, which was -- which was nice; we appreciate that. But there was no -- there were no questions regarding service. None of our references were called. Nobody from our office was contacted about any of the -- the questions that were in there. From a service standpoint, we are the only local third-party administrator, the only T.P.A. bidding that's looking at establishing a local service office here, because we've been writing a lot of business in this area, so we already have client services people that come up here at least once a month, generally twice a month, to review reports, things like that. I'll also tell you that from doing an evaluation in io-zz-o~ 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 this -- in this community, I have a similar organization as the county that has 400 people, and the costs range about ', 2.7 million. On your 243, you're at about 2.1. So, I would think there's a lot of things that can be done, and from a service standpoint, Entrust is willing to do that, but our biggest concern at this point is the bids were opened on October 8th. They were presented. The numbers were disclosed for public record. We had a copy of all the numbers. And then, after the fact, I guess, the -- the broker and the consultant went out to negotiate, and that's not normally how the bid process works. And, quite frankly, insurance bids are no different than any other bid, 'cause it's a county law, not an insurance law. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Jacobson, was a copy of your -- your figures, as submitted, furnished to you by Mr. Looney off of his spreadsheet to ask you if those were accurately represented? MR. JACOBS: I did not receive anything from Mr. Looney on -- JUDGE TINLEY: Did you receive it from Mr. Wallace? MR. JACOBS: I think Don Wallace, in the last week, did send something to Entrust, but that was after we had a copy of the spreadsheet. We did not respond to change the numbers, because that would be a violation of the -- JUDGE TINLEY: Were you given an opportunity to io-z2-o~ 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 submit a final and best offer? MR. JACOBS: Last week we were allowed to give one up to Friday at 5 o'clock. We were unwilling to do so, because that would change our bid. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the issue is -- I mean, if the bid procedures were followed properly, that's the issue, and that's the issue I'm going to ask the County Attorney to -- MR. LOONEY: One correction. He said 25 minutes. We had allocated -- I told them 9:30; the representative didn't show up until ten minutes till 10:00, and I had another appointment that I had to go to, that I had to leave. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- that part, to me, is irrelevant. The issue that I'm concerned with is -- I mean, what he's saying is that it's whether the bid procedure was followed. He wasn't going to change the numbers, period. MR. LOONEY: I'd be more than happy to have the representative from the Department of Insurance give you a call and let you know, because I work with him frequently. So -- MR. EMERSON: All I can do, Commissioner Letz, would be offer to meet with Mr. Looney later and go through the procedures that were followed and compare them with the statutes, 'cause I don't have any knowledge of the procedures io-2z-o~ 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 that were followed. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's my preference. Because I think -- I mean, I just think there's a shadow under it. I mean, you know, I don't -- I'm not going to vote in favor of awarding a contract when that issue being brought up is a pretty serious concern about following bid procedures. I think it would invalidate -- if it was determined down the road that our procedures were not followed, that would invalidate this whole exercise and waste a lot of people's time. So, if that can be done by you in the next week, then we'll -- you know, or next two weeks, we can do it. If we need to call a special meeting, we'll call a special meeting. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or we could do it today. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I don't know if Rex is going to have time today to -- that's just from my vote. Maybe y'all can ... COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I agree. I see it as a serious issue. That's the reason I brought it up. The gentleman in the back with Entrust says that it's not an insurance issue; it's a county issue, or a state law issue I think is what he meant, probably. And if a bidding law is a bidding law, a bidding law is a bidding law. I mean, I don't know that it's not. And what Commissioner Letz is saying is, somebody needs to tell us, are we fixing to break the law or not? io-zz-o~ 46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I agree. Because there's a serious accusation made -- or an assertion made in this letter that our consultant violated the bid protocols and so forth. That needs to be clarified. JUDGE TINLEY: I assume that we're going to hang that one on the hook for the time being? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Unless the County Attorney can stand up and -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think he said -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- declare. MR. EMERSON: I'm not a genie. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're not? JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. LOONEY: I'll try to make him one real quick. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is there a time frame in which this all has to be put to bed? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Fortunately, we're early this year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we were. That's the reason I asked the question. MR. LOONEY: We're early. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So we're not up against the gun here? MR. LOONEY: Other than the fact that we've got to make a lot of changes as a result of Mutual of Omaha leaving, io-zz-o~ 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 and we want to make sure we get all of our timing done appropriately for enrollment purposes. JUDGE TINLEY: We probably want to get this resolved not later than the first meeting in November, I would think. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: 'Cause we got to do an enrollment. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Whole new enrollment. And that's going to take at least 30 days, wouldn't it? MR. LOONEY: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. If nobody else has anything further to offer on that, let's go to Item 5; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to consolidate cellular telephone contracts into a single account, and authorize County Judge to sign same. I've been working with Mr. Trolinger on this. What we're trying to put together is a package much like the Sheriff's Office has, where all of his people are consolidated under one contract out there with one block of minutes. He can add phones, purchase additional minutes. I know the Court has been concerned about the variable cell phone costs, reimbursement issues. Different contracts, different departments. I put down some guidelines that hopefully will be kind of an outline. John has been discussing with the phone company, Five Star Wireless, how io-22-0~ 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 we're going to put that together. The other thing I've done, I've asked each department head and elected official to furnish me with a roster of persons who have a need to have a cell phone to conduct county business and the approximate number of minutes each month that each would use, so that we can start working from that. That's kind of where I am. John may have some more current information on it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I've got a question. So, this is your document here? JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: The plan is my document, yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. All cell phones on which county business is conducted other than the Sheriff's Office. Now, are you -- is our end goal to have everybody, or is the Sheriff's Office still going to be a separate -- I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings; I just want to know. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, he's already got himself a plan put in place. We might be able just to add to his. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's what I'm asking. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If his works -- he's not going to like that; I can hear it already. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Take it from his budget. io-zz-o~ 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 OEHLER: I like that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If it works -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what we started talking about originally. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If I may, okay? I do have -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm through; it's okay. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I do have some issues with that part of it, okay? And John -- John can verify this and check up on it. We've worked on getting our plan the best, ~', and kind of tweaked the best we can possibly get. I get I detailed phone call listings of every phone call that my 31 phones on the contract make, and I go through those every month to make sure that my department is within -- you know, staying in business, things like that. There's also a lot of undercover type calls being -- our narcotics unit and everything else. I do not want and would object to those -- that detailed bill, okay, going anywhere other than me as the department head to review and make sure it's doing right. I don't need those kind of phone calls out. So, mainly because of that -- and if you look at ours, and John can -- can check, and we can check with Rose over there at the phone company; they can give the rest of the county the same exact plan I have. My plan went into effect -- it's a two-year deal, went into effect July of '06, and I really want the Sheriff's office plan to stay separate for a lot of those io-22-0~ 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 reasons. And it does give me very good control overseeing all those individual bills, 'cause John can tell you, we run right close to our minutes, but I do stay on it. And I do check it, as a department head should. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree. Rusty, before you get off into four-wheel drive stuff, did you say 31? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have 31 phones over there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And how many -- how many -- pretend the Sheriff doesn't exist. How many do we have outside of that? MR. TROLINGER: Thirty-two -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- j MR. TROLINGER: -- additional phones I've counted county-wide. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we can do something very similar, probably, with just numbers. JUDGE TINLEY: That was the model. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The phone company said they'd give the same exact plan I have. It's just the rest of the county had some real -- some that are real old plans where you're paying 14.95 a phone. That all needs to be redone, and you can do an full plan on that, same exact as I have with the Sheriff's Office. JUDGE TINLEY: Actually, we're going to do -- end io-zz-o~ 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 up with a better plan than yours. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, ain't going to happen. I We'll see. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what are we doing today, Judge? Are we authorizing to do -- to follow up to create this plan? JUDGE TINLEY: John put it on the agenda. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are we doing, John? MR. TROLINGER: I have -- JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think we have a specific proposal yet, do we? MR. TROLINGER: We do not have a specific proposal. This is simply authorization to go forward with -- with consolidating the contract. And once the numbers are worked out, have the -- have the County Judge sign the contract to consolidate those phone plans. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to authorize Mr. Trolinger to proceed with consolidating cell phone contract for all county employees except the Sheriff's Department. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And bring the contract back to the Court for approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as io-22-0~ 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 indicated. Further question or discussion? MR. TROLINGER: And to note the Sheriff's plan -- the main benefit of keeping that separate is the Sheriff enjoys some -- less fees. There are a couple fees or federal taxes that the Sheriff's -- law enforcement is exempt from, so that's the primary purpose of separating. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many minutes at what cost are we looking at? MR. TROLINGER: I have all the numbers here. The Sheriff's Office, 32 phones at 5,000 minutes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Total? MR. TROLINGER: Yes. The base rate plus the per-phone rate is about $6,100 per year, and then we'd have a similar -- similar rate for the other 32 county phones, predicated on -- that we can move some of the -- some of the users that are on different service providers over to Five Star. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's going to save us a lot of money, 'cause some -- I mean, we have some departments that are $50 a month, or some individuals that are $50 a month. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure. MR. TROLINGER: I've estimated between $4,000 and $5,000 per year savings. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good. io-aa-o~ 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 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Even with the break that the Sheriff's getting on some of those fees, we'll negotiate a better contract than he's got, John. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Nah. MR. TROLINGER: And I'd also like to thank Eva Hyde; she put together most of these numbers for the phones, and Five Star for working with us, because they're going to take a $4,000 or $5,000 hit, basically, even though we're i going to bring them some more phones over from some other providers. They've been really good about working with me, you know. Really a good deal all the way around. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It works. And, you know, when some of the old contracts are paying 14.95 a phone, just the base, before any calls, you take my 31 phones I have on the contract, and you -- using 5,000 minutes last month, probably a little over 5,000 minutes, divide that into -- take our bill and divide that into the number of phones, it came out to $16.28 a phone is what I'm paying per month, total. COMMISSIONER LETZ: John, anyone who wants to, they can keep their current phone numbers, correct? MR. TROLINGER: Yes, that is correct. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Whether they're with Five Star or Sprint or anybody else right now. MR. TROLINGER: Numbers are portable. I verified io-22-0~ 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that with Five Star, and they can move the numbers. JUDGE TINLEY: Two qualifiers. Number one, the department head or elected official must make a determination that the individual needs a cell phone to do county business, and the cell phone that'll be issued to that person will be only for county business. Now, what they do on their own, that's up to them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any further 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've got a 10 o'clock timed item that we've run a little bit past, so let's get to that. Item 11; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on request from the Kerrville Christmas Lighting Corporation to participate in or otherwise assist in the cost of electrical upgrades at the courthouse. Is Mr. Bond here? No, that's right -- MR. BONDY: He has a pinch-hitter today. First of all, I'd be remiss if I didn't thank Commissioners for allowing the stage to be used this past weekend downtown on the Star. We had about 700 or 800 people downtown for the 10-22-07 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 55 As you know, Kyle Bond, who is president of our organization, has been before you on a couple of occasions talking about what the group is doing for the coming year, one of which is putting in the new archway at the front entrance, which the footings have already been poured -- concrete footings have already been poured on that. And the other was to address the electrical issues up on the roof, putting in some outlets that would keep us from having to have power outages like we did last year especially, and having a lot of live wires sitting in water once again, as we did last year. The lighting corporation spent about $6,500 to have that electrical work done this summer. However, in the course of that work being done and completed, we learned that the electricity that's up there is not up to current code. It's 100-amp service, where 200-amp is now required. And we received a quote from D.W. Electric for $8,213, and to be very honest with you, as good as our fundraising has been this year, it may not be enough to be able to offset that amount of money. It is my hope -- our hope; there are several of us that are here in attendance today -- that perhaps the Commissioners would consider helping us, possibly splitting that cost and -- and allowing us to get the work done in time for this year's Christmas season. Our first io-aa-o~ 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 work Saturday is actually coming up this coming Saturday, the 27th, and the work will take a bit of time to complete. And, obviously, the goal is to have it done in time for the lighting on the 17th. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I presume you've visited with our Maintenance Director and he's all up to speed as to what the plan is, or requirements to do the upgrade to 200-amp service? MR. BONDY: Yes, sir. I'm going to have to defer -- I believe Kyle has talked with him, and I believe he's aware of the situation, yes. It is -- it's -- from what I understand, and I'm no electrical person, but the roof can't sustain the power board. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tim, do you have in your budget 4,000 extra dollars somewhere? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Stand up, Tim, when you answer, so we can see you. MR. BOLLIER: I can find it, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Let me -- let me clarify a bit what Mr. Bondy has said. As -- as all of you recall, at the time that we renewed our agreement with the Christmas Lighting Corporation, it was part of that agreement that the electrical circuitry up on the roof was going to have to be upgraded, and that was a given, and they agreed to that. They did that. It was at the end of all of that work that -- io-22-0~ 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 at the tail end of all of this that it was discovered that we did not have a neutral leg up there serving the roof, and that was brought to Tim's attention. He brought it to my attention, and as a consequence, we went to our electrical service providers, and that's where they came up with that. Apparently, no one really thought to check it until towards the end of the game, and to and behold, up jumps this $8,400 booger. So, that's kind of how we got where we are. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I'm not opposed to spending tax dollars on an upgrade to the physical part of the building. JUDGE TINLEY: It's our structure. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's our building. I don't have a problem with that. If they're willing to pay half, I think we should come up with $4,200, the other half. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that. It's our structure, and it's beneficial to us for safety reasons. I And -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's required for safety reasons. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. So -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now, I do -- you know, I think that I'm -- my preference would be for the money to come out of the Maintenance budget if it's there, but at the same time, we don't want to cut other things off. We have some io-22-0~ 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 other contingency funds that we can look at. I think I'd like to, you know, approve proceeding with it, and then letting the Maintenance Director and the Auditor get together and find the funds between their budget and other possible funds. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's a motion. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as indicated to approve the agenda item, to pay half the cost of the electrical upgrade, with the determination of funding source to be worked out between the Maintenance Director and the Auditor. Question or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a -- I have a couple of comments. Mrs. Kirby called me last night -- my good friend, Louise Kirby, called me at home last night and asked me to participate in this, and -- as her Commissioner, and I stated to her that I wasn't quite that far in my book yet; I was still in the insurance business. And when I got to the lighting thing, Ms. Kirby, there's not one piece of information in here for me to make a decision. So, I don't know what happened, and it's a lot easier for me to have information so I can make decisions before I get in here, but it wasn't there. And also, I wanted to make a point that recently, Mr. Lehmann's letter to the editor about how stupid 10-22-07 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 some of us guys sitting at this table are, and then we turn around, and, "You're stupid. Please give me some money." And that's very distasteful to me. But -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who said I was stupid? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, he was talking about you. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not the first. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But I took up for you. But I'm certainly in favor of doing this, and we're talking about half of it. Is that what we're talking about? MR. BONDY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Talking about half of it. MR. BONDY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Only because it's our facility, and we need to keep it upgraded and stay within guidelines. A lot of y'all do a wonderful job, but I think it's very inappropriate for Mr. Lehmann to call us stupid in the -- in a letter to the editor. And I've just about run out of -- run out of my friendliness with him. MR. BONDY: Point taken. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You might point out, that's not the same Mr. Lehmann for whom we have a thing out there on the lawn. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Gazebo. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. It's Mr. Lehmann 10-22-07 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 that's a part of your group. '~, JUDGE TINLEY: Which, by the way, is not George Lehmann. The gentleman's name is Gene Lehmann, G.E. Lehmann. And as long as we're -- as long as we're chucking a few rocks, I don't know where our local newspaper came up with George Lehmann. Two -- two lines later, they identified him as Gene. I don't know who's doing the proofreading over there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe it's -- JUDGE TINLEY: Correction, I don't know if there's anybody doing proofreading. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May be Mr. Lehmann, the other Mr. Lehmann. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that could be. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But I'm throwing rocks at -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought there was a new letter. You're talking about the old letter where I was talking about the -- where I put my foot my mouth about decorations. Is that the letter you're talking about? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, that's the letter. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We saved enough money on cell phone service to pay for it. JUDGE TINLEY: And we got both of ourselves in 25 I trouble. io-22-0~ 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 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not going to say anything else. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank you, Mr. Bondy. MR. BONDY: Thank you, gentlemen. Appreciate it. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move back, if we might, to Item Number 6; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to update the broadband Internet services agreement with Time Warner Cable, and authorize County Judge to sign same. MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. The -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: John, I just want to make one more stupid statement. Ma'am? There is not any information for me to make a decision here either. Go ahead. MR. TROLINGER: Very simple. The new contract provides us with -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Doesn't bother him at all. MR. TROLINGER: -- a threefold increase in speed -- download speed, and reduces the cost by about $170 per year. io-zz-o~ 62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Reduces? MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: How much more information do you need, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved, whatever it is. I We want it. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval as indicated. Further question or discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Go over those numbers again. What was the reduction? I don't have any backup either. MR. TROLINGER: It's about $168 per year reduction from the current contract. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. TROLINGER: It's a minor reduction, but we're receiving threefold increase in -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Went down. Better hurry up and vote; it's going down. COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right, thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other 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. io-zz-o~ 63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Now we can finally get Leonard up here. Item 8; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for the revision of plat for Lot 67 of Cypress Springs Estates, Phase 2, Section One, as set forth in Volume 7, Page 172 of the Plat Records, and set public hearing for the same, that property located in Precinct 4. MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. This revision is to be done ii ~', under the alternate plat process, and will take .68 of an acre that was previously unplatted. As you see in the agenda item, it was unplatted, and they're adding that to Lot 67 of Cypress Springs Estates, Phase 2, Section One. We ask at this time that you set the public hearing for 10 o'clock a.m. November the 26th, 2007. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So moved. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to set a public hearing on the revision of plat for Lot 67 of Cypress Springs Estates, Phase 2, Section One, for 10 a.m. on November 26th, 2007. Any question or discussion on that motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quick comment. I don't know if -- Leonard, you might want to stay. We have a subdivision item on the agenda later on. io-22-0~ 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 MR. ODOM: Right. Three things I was going to check for. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This type of thing, I believe, will not require a public hearing in the future, which is good news. This is just an informational item because of some new state law. MR. ODOM: New state law? COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, may not, I should say. Which would be a good thing. Some of these revisions, adjusting lot lines and all that, will not require -- MR. ODOM: Something minor like they're doing. As it stands right now -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: It is, so we got to do it right now. MR. ODOM: We have to do it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But just for information. Okay. MR. ODOM: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Somebody make a motion? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, I did. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I seconded. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Seconded already? Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, you're behind. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion? io-zz-o~ 65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. We'll move to Item 9; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to amend Court Order Number 30504 to use Fund 20 to purchase a used excavator. MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Before, I had come to the I~ Court asking to buy an excavator from Waukesha-Pierce, or I what we were looking at, for over 206,000. The Court approved the purchase of a used excavator out of Fund 20 in the 2006-2007 budget. At the time, the only machine we had a price for was a Waukesha-Pierce for 206,055.40. Since then, we found a 2007 with only 51 hours, a nine-month warranty for all parts and service, and delivery from Continental Equipment, the Gradall dealer in Dallas. The price is only $474.49 more. This would be an HGAC contract, and does not require a bid. Fund 20 has a total of 211,535.44. At this time, we ask that you amend the court order to allow Road and Bridge to purchase the best machine available, not to exceed 206,529.89. JUDGE TINLEY: The Waukesha-Pierce that you proposed before you became aware of this one, what model was io-aa-o~ 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 lt? MR. ODOM: That was a 4100 series. This is a 3100 series. It had about 1,400 hours on it, had no warranty. And at the time, we were under the impression that we had to wait till 1 October to do this. Well, that wasn't the case, but we misunderstood. They leased it out; it's in Laredo, Texas, so that is gone. And then I looked at the 41 and compared. It is about 4 to 5 feet longer than the 3100 series, which is closer to what we have now. And considering that, plus another 10,000 pounds heavier, that I felt like using it on some of the structures I have, I didn't want that type of weight. The table swing itself was bigger than what we have presently, and that 3100 is -- will be quite adequate; there's only 2 foot of reach difference. And I couldn't get a warranty at all. It would cost me another 5,000 or 6,000 on top of that to make sure I had a -- something that's been used. We felt like this was the way to go, with a factory warranty for the $479 more. It was -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you. JUDGE TINLEY: This one's more suitable, actually, for your needs? MR. ODOM: More suitable to what I had. When we first found that, we were trying to find something there, and we felt that was the best that I had seen. There was another one in Tulsa. I haven't gone to see it, but I've got the io-zz-o~ 67 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 pictures. This was the best deal. And I had the Dallas ', dealer wanting to -- to work with us. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quick question. Cheryl, is there any difference or preference in canceling and issuing a new order versus amending an old order? ~' THE CLERK: Doesn't make any difference. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval of the agenda item. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item as indicated. Any further question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to Item 10; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to accept petition to vacate and discontinue road for part of Upper Turtle Creek Road, and the posting of the same. MR. ODOM: Yes. Upper Turtle Creek Road went very close to Mr. and Mrs. Harden's home, and they wanted it moved to a better location on their property. They worked with Commissioner Baldwin and Road and Bridge Department to locate and build a new road constructed to county specs. The io-aa-o~ 68 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 property owners paid all the construction and legal costs for the road. The road has been finished for some time, and we Attorney has reviewed the documents, and as we understand, the following items need to be addressed today: The approval of an affidavit of posting notice and approval for Len Odom to sign same; approval of the sign to be posted at both ends of the new section of Upper Turtle Creek road, as well as posting at the courthouse door; acceptance of petition to vacate, abandon, and discontinue road signed by property owners. And we will post the road today, October the 22nd, 2007, and after the 20-day posting, we will return to the Court on November the 13th, 2007, for approval of the order of vacating, closing, and abandoning a portion of the old road and approval from Judge Tinley to sign same. Once this is approved and completed and returned to Jons law firm, they will execute the road dedication deed. If possible, we'd like to get approval on November the 13th, 2007, for the Judge to sign the dedication -- dedication deed without coming back to the Court another time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are we doing anything today? MR. ODOM: I'm basically -- go ahead, I'm sorry. MR. EMERSON: What you need to do today is approve io-zz-o~ 69 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the posting. Technically speaking, the posting has to occur before you accept the application. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. EMERSON: So you can accept the application and approve the order at the next Commissioners Court, but -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I understand that you have to have some kind of posting here at the courthouse, at the beginning and the ending of the road. Or depends on which way you're going. MR. ODOM: We have done this before. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Both ends of the road. MR. ODOM: That's right. We've done this before, off Drummond. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And -- that's exactly right, and that's the posting. That runs a certain period of time, and then -- MR. ODOM: Twenty days. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- then you get into this vacating and all that stuff. I move for approval. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the posting as indicated. Any further question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) io-ZZ-o~ 70 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to Item 12, if we might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on issues related to the Airport Board. ', COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Again? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Still. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Still. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Still. Rex, you see we have a dignitary from the city back there. MR. EMERSON: Morning, Mike. MR. HAYES: Morning. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Honorable Mike Hayes. MR. EMERSON: The reason we're here, the issue's been raised several times as to whether or not the airport authority as originally voted on by the voters is the current managing authority for the airport, and the only way we can get there is for me to walk you through the timeline of events with the airport. So, if you would bear with me, I provided it to you in writing, but I'm going to skip straight to 1966. And I'm sorry -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wow, fast jump. MR. EMERSON: I could go to 1943; could be worse. November 8, 1966, constitutional amendment of Article 9, Section 12, authorizes airport authorities to be established io-2z-o~ 71 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 statute the Kerr County Airport Authority, which subsequently becomes House Bill 956. April 21st, 1967, the City approves House Bill 956. June 8, 1967, House Bill 956 is approved by the Legislature to become effective August 28th of '67. Now we have a two-year lag, and in February of 1969, the Airport Zoning Board is established by the City, with representation designated as two city, two county, and one representative appointed by both. July 29th, 1969, the City and the County Joint Municipal Airport Zoning Board creates the Board of Adjustment with five members. 1969-1970, sometime in there -- and please bear in mind, I put this data together with compilation of notes I could find from the City, notes from the County, and old newspaper articles from Kerrville Daily Times. 1969-1970, the Chamber of Commerce requested a call for election of the airport authority that was previously approved by the Legislature back in '67. February 24th of 1970, the City appoints a five-member airport board under the Texas Municipal Airport Act pending a call of election to create the airport authority. February 25th, 1970, the County essentially adopts the same order under a county order. March 10, 1970, the City completes the joint airport board approval. March 13th, the County confirms the io-z2-o~ 72 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 legislation for airport authority to the City, and the City elects to appoint airport authority board members instead of electing them, following the recommendation of the airport board. The reason that's important is because, under House Bill 956, there's two ways for the airport board to be appointed for the members. One is election; one is appointment by the City. And where the appointment by the City comes in is, it states the City gets to choose which way the board members are appointed, and then the County ratifies it at that point. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doesn't that statute, however, say that that's done in concurrence with the two governing bodies? MR. EMERSON: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One with the other? MR. EMERSON: Correct. April 17 of 1970, the County accepts and certifies the citizens' petition for airport authority and orders an election. May 16 of 1970, there's a county election for the airport authority, and on May 22nd, the county canvasses the election votes and declares creation of the airport authority. Now, pursuant to io-Za-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 73 into creation. There is no record ever, anywhere, of the appointment of the board members into this authority. Okay? June -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was an act that should MR. EMERSON: Should have been done by the County jointly -- we voted, but we talked to them before we voted. MR. EMERSON: Correct. So the ball -- at some point, for whatever reason, that -- that action was not taken. June 29, 1970, the County appoints members of the Airport Board of Adjustment. April 12, 1977, there's a seven-year lapse in any kind of activity I could find that's recorded. Joint airport board recommends to the City that ownership and management be turned over to the City. And June 28th, 1977, the City considers annexing the airport for the tax revenue. January 10 of 1978, the airport board recommends that when annexation is complete, the City will have better control of the airport, and an airport manager 10-22-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 74 where we ended up now. July 1978, the airport board asks for a manager to be hired. June 26 of '79, the City appoints an airport development coordinator. June 8th of 1982, the City amends the airport standards to provide for a City/County airport fund to isolate the funding -- the cash flow between the City and the County to a separate fund. July 26, 1986, the County turns over the water system to the City that supplies the airport. January 27th of '87, City confirms the airport board status as advisory only.. February 9th of '87, the County confirms the airport status as advisory only. Once again, not pointing fingers, but I'm not sure, number one, under the Municipal Airport Act, that that's authorized, and it's definitely not following what the voters wanted to do when they voted in 1970 to create an authority. August 25th of '87, the City amends the ordinance establishing airport board to state "advisory only." It's subsequently passed by section reading in September of '87. May 8th of 1990, the airport manager is designated as a contact person for contractual issues. March 24th of 1992, it's interesting; City staff notes that the airport board is not being appointed per ordinance. Okay. Now, frankly, I didn't go io-22-0~ 1 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 There's a new city airport code in May of 1997. Subparagraph 1, is not merely advisory, but has all the powers of the Texas Municipal Airport Act, which is now Chapter 22, which is what we're currently operating under. And in Paragraph 6, the airport authority, although created via an election in 1970, has never been activated, has no taxing authority, and is not the entity that now exists and manages the affairs of the airport. And then on July 26th of 2004, the County approves a new interlocal agreement for joint management of the airport under Texas Transportation Code, Chapter 22, which, as previously stated, is a successor to the Municipal Airport Act. The City subsequently approves that interlocal agreement in August of 2004, and then a new airport code is approved in 2005. And the reason this issue comes up is because it -- the issue of the original airport authority that was blessed by the voters back in May of 1970, when you go back and you read the newspaper articles, the whole reason for appointing that authority and electing that authority was to create an io-Z2-o~ 76 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 independent governing body for the airport so that it could authority would be able to go back to the voters to determine whether or not they could obtain taxing authority in order to be self-sufficient, instead of the funds coming from both sides and the ever popular battles that occur every year over that. The issue once again has been raised, and the problem arises in that, because the statute specifically designates that those board members should be appointed within 10 days of designation of the authority, there's some question as to whether, 37 years later, we can even go in and raise that authority. I talked to the Texas Legislative Research Library their attorneys and stated that they had never run across this particular issue before, did not know whether it would be valid or not. At this point, I would recommend that y'all request an opinion from the Attorney General's office in order to put this matter to bed once and for all. If this authority were resurrected without an opinion from the Attorney General, and subsequently did go to the voters and request to be given taxing authority, and they did approve io-zz-o~ 77 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it, I think you could be -- have some serious issues as to COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a couple of comments thank Commissioner Williams, 'cause he dug up a lot of those documents and then asked Rex to go through them. I think this is -- it's an issue that we really do need to put behind us. There are a lot of actions by both the City and the County in the last 30-plus years that were just done, and many times contrary to the -- the vote of the voters. And that's something that seems very odd to me, that that -- I mean, that happens. And it -- it goes over such a long period of time and through so many different people that no one's, you know, responsible necessarily, but it needs to be cleared up. Because I think, once again -- and I think everyone's aware that we're -- the whole airport governance issue is back on the table; we're waiting to work on a new agreement, and I think it needs to be determined once and for all whether that authority exists or does not exist. To me, from a practical standpoint, I don't see a huge difference, 'cause that seems to be the direction we want to go. We want to have an independent board running the to-zz-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 78 airport. Whether it's done under the authority, that's fine, or if we say the authority has gone, we'll do it a different way. That's fine. But I think that I certainly support Rex's decision -- or recommendation to go to the Attorney General for a final determination, because I think it would be to the benefit of everybody to get this resolved so we can ', move forward and get everything on a better running basis at the airport. And I don't know if that requires -- we have to give you an order -- a court order to just ask you to -- MR. EMERSON: A request. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This Commissioner is requesting. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll support that, because I think it's important. When I wrote the memorandum for Rex in September, all I had the benefit of was what we had on file in the County Clerk's office, and then subsequent to that, I went to the -- to the record -- to the history center and researched the old newspapers going back to 1970, when all this began to take shape. I have one question, Rex, and one comment. In your research, you've turned up a lot of documents, I guess, that the City had, or perhaps were in your files. I don't know where they were. Have you come across any repealers for House Bill 956, which established the Kerr County Airport Authority? MR. EMERSON: Absolutely not. And according to the io-zz-o~ 79 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. MR. EMERSON: The statute's still in existence, and the statute was not absorbed into Chapter 22. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Was not absorbed? MR. EMERSON: It still stands independently. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 'Cause it was, I think, intended by the voters, when they did the constitutional amendment back in '69, to set the airport authority up separately and give them their own structure and status and whatever, whatever. And if memory serves me correctly, there was only four that originally were set up as a result of that constitutional amendment going way back. The other thing is, the comment is, in looking at all these old newspaper reports going back, this was an initiative that came out of the City, the airport authority. And I was surprised to learn that, because that was one of the questions. Where did this come about? Who came to Commissioners Court and said, "Hey, we need to create an airport authority"? Because there was a petition sent -- filed with about nine -- almost 1,000 signatures on it, and the articles reveal that this really was an initiative that came out of the Chamber directly to the City Council, for the reasons that the County Attorney points out. They wanted one io-aa-o~ 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 body to govern and make those decisions with respect to the airport and its improvements and whatever took place out But -- and in anticipation of what they -- of the authority, they set up a commission under the old Transportation Code or the old Municipal Airport Act, whatever that was. And while I can' t find any -- any record anywhere that indicates or confirms this, it is a strong suspicion in my mind that when they appointed the commission and they named five very -- very high-stature citizens of Kerr County to represent or to be on that commission, I just kind of believe in the back of my head their intention -- because they sent the resolution over here with those five names; the Commissioners Court accepted that resolution. It was their intention for those same five that they put on the commission to ultimately be named to the airport authority if approved by the voters of Kerr County. It subsequently was approved, but there never was that document that came back to the Commissioners Court naming those as airport authority people. 'Cause they had some very prominent citizens named to go to that commission at the outset. So, whatever that is, if it was neglect -- benign neglect or whatever, and then for 17 years, the record that I found went dark until that letter came from the former City Manager saying, "We just discovered that we don't have io-a2-o~ 81 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 enough authority to negotiate leases, and we gave these people some authority they don't really want or deserve." So, let's get it straightened out. I agree with you. JUDGE TINLEY: Rex, back in 1970, when the joint airport board -- Kerrville/Kerr County Joint Airport Board was created by the combined actions of the City and the County, were those lawful acts to create that particular entity? MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: So far as you know? MR. EMERSON: As far as I know. JUDGE TINLEY: Has there been any action by the don't think you can modify state law by this body, by the City Council, or the combined efforts of both. But has there been any lawful action by either the City or the County to disband, eliminate, or do away with the Kerrville/Kerr County Joint Airport Board? MR. EMERSON: The short answer would be no. In 2003-2004, that airport board was modified by agreement under Texas Transportation Code, Chapter 22, which subsequently absorbed the Texas Municipal Airport Act. io-aa-o~ 82 1 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: That was a codification, really, I wasn't it? MR. EMERSON: There was an interlocal agreement that modified the way that airport board governed, and the complement thereof. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, there's two -- there's the authority that was voted by the voters, and then there's the acts by the City and the County to operate under the Transportation Code. MR. EMERSON: Correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which was the most recent action we took, yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was really interesting in all that research was that the first four signators on that petition were the City Council. MR. EMERSON: I don't think there's any doubt from the research that it was the intent of the voters in both bodies to make an independent airport authority, but just -- somewhere between Point A and B, it fell off the table. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. And what your -- your purpose here today is to advise us that we've got these questions hanging, and it's your intention to ask for an Attorney General's opinion as to the legal status of primarily the authority, and -- and maybe the joint airport io-zz-o~ 83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 board, too. I don't know. Maybe you want to include them both. MR. EMERSON: We could, but I think the real issue is whether or not the authority is a viable entity at this point in time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But can you have the authority -- I mean, I think, from what the Judge is saying a little bit, if you -- I guess the authority issue will answer, can you have both an authority and. operate the other way? Can you do it two ways? I mean, the vote of the authority may have canceled out the ability to operate under the current Transportation Code. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I think that's correct, that it did. The authority takes precedence. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, therefore, we can't operate under, you know, Chapter 22 right now, or -- Chapter 22? MR. EMERSON: In theory, I think you would be correct, except that 37 years later, the authority never being populated, it may or may not exist. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Well, that's why we have the Attorney General. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, Center Point incorporated years ago and then had to disincorporate, because they found out later they were and didn't want to be. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Strange things happen. io-aa-o~ 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 JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions? Comments? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Rex. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you need a formal I motion? JUDGE TINLEY: He said he doesn't need it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This -- in this newspaper, I thought it was really interesting that Mr. Schwethelm, that was the Chamber of Commerce guy, says he wanted to work toward improving the industrial climate, with the object of keeping present industry and attracting new industry. We hear that same thing every year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Every year. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is 1970. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think Judge Tinley said the very same thing about two weeks ago. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, two or three times. ~~, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Exact same words. Unbelievable. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else with regard to that agenda item? Let's go ahead and take about a 15-minute recess. (Recess taken from 10:46 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if we might. Next item on the agenda is Item 13, to consider, io-22-0~ 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 discuss, and take appropriate action to honor request from Texas Association for Home Care to declare November 2007 as Home Care and Hospice Month in Kerr County. I put this on the agenda at the request of -- of the Texas Association for Home Care. Apparently they're doing this all over the state. This is a matter in which Commissioner Baldwin has a very stong and abiding interest. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is it? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Number 13. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Oh, yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that a move for approval? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It is, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I'm honored to do so. JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and second for approval of the agenda item. Any question or discussion on the motion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One typographical correction under the Resolved, third line. "Encourages" the authority. Should be plural. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, where is that, Bill? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The word "encourage" needs io-22-0~ 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 to have an "S" on it. Encourages. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's why I make the big I bucks. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to Item 14; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to approve the contracts with Kerr Economic Development Foundation, Big Brothers and Sisters, K'Star, Divide Volunteer Fire Department, Mountain Home Volunteer Fire Department, Center Point Volunteer Fire Department, Hunt Volunteer Fire Department, Comfort Volunteer Fire Department, Elm Pass Volunteer Fire Department, Ingram Volunteer Fire Department, Castle Lake Volunteer Fire Department, and Tierra Linda Volunteer Fire Department, and allow the County Judge to sign same. Mr. Emerson, these contracts are just this year's version of the same contracts that we've had in place for some period of time? MR. EMERSON: That's my understanding, Judge. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. to-zz-o~ 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 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where's Upper Turtle Creek? MS. GRINSTEAD: They haven't returned it yet. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Where is Castle Lake Volunteer Fire Department? COMMISSIONER LETZ: -It's down -- it's actually in Bandera County, right there in that far corner area. They serve a couple hundred people of Kerr County. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I didn't know where that was. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You got to go out of county to get there. JUDGE TINLEY: That's right, you literally do. Any other questions or comments? MS. HARGIS: Yes, I do. I don't have specifically with one of these, but you had -- when I first got here, I had a letter on my desk where you approved the Auditor's office doing an audit for -- I think it was the ESD 1, and perhaps ESD 2, the emergency service districts that cover some of these volunteer fire departments. And Tommy probably could have performed those audits without a problem, but because I am a C.P.A., I can't -- because I'm not independent, I cannot do that. And if I do do that audit, then you're going to have to pay more for me to have a peer review than you would for them to have their audit on their io-zz-o.~ 88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 own, because I cannot audit without having a peer review, and the minimum is $5,000. JUDGE TINLEY: For a peer review or an audit? MS. HARGIS: No, if do I an audit, -- JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. MS. HARGIS: -- I have to have a peer review, period. MR. EMERSON: What agenda item are we on? MS. HARGIS: We're on 14. They're talking about approval of those contracts, and part of those contracts are for me to do an audit on those, so I just wanted to bring that up. JUDGE TINLEY: Is it required that an audit be MS. HARGIS: Yes, under the Health and Safety Code, they're supposed to have an independent audit. JUDGE TINLEY: For a fire department? MS. HARGIS: The ESD's. The fire departments don't have to have, but ESD's do. JUDGE TINLEY: We don't have any ESD's in this group of contracts. MS. HARGIS: Well, they govern this, though. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: ESD's got nothing to do with fire department. MS. HARGIS: Okay. io-22-0~ 89 1 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: We'll have to address that at another time. MS. HARGIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But when it comes up, we can't do that. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Remember so you can stop JUDGE TINLEY: I don't see any provision in here with respect to audit. MS. HARGIS: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: If it's there, I don't ... COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The volunteer fire departments aren't required to have an audit. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But that provision, Judge -- is that provision in our agreement with KEDF, Big Brothers and Sisters, and K'Star? ~' COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then we may require an audit, but we don't do the audit. Ms. Hargis is saying that she can't do an audit. We've never done an audit for those entities. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was the question. Does the contract say we do it, or does it just say an audit will be done? In which case, anybody else ought to do the audit and give us a copy of it, right? MS. HARGIS: Well, in most -- in most instances, io-zz-o~ 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 ', when I owned my own firm, it was recommended, and usually in their bylaws of volunteer fire departments, there's a suggestion that they have a review by an audit committee or that they can perform one. And depending on the size of the volunteer department, which these are not that big at this stage of the game. The larger they get, it's highly recommended, but it's the ESD that would then request that they do that, because the ESD provides the funding. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we've gone off our agenda item, 'cause we're not -- we can't talk about ESD's. MS. HARGIS: Okay. But just -- they provide the funding. JUDGE TINLEY: I don't see it in the contracts I've reviewed. MS. HARGIS: Okay. I'll put it on the agenda for I next time. JUDGE TINLEY: The records are available for public inspection. Performance reviews are required, for example, by -- by Big Brothers/Big Sisters under federal law. They're required to comply with those. There's nothing in any of these that I see that have anything to do with audit. 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. 10-22-07 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 (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I've had some requests from landowners who have property that actually goes out into the ', lake, that it be drained so they can do some cleanup and maintenance along their docks and various things. It hasn't been done in 11 years. And I've also called the -- Bob Sweeney, who is the head legal for Texas Parks and Wildlife, to see if there was any problem with doing this and cleaning up those areas that were -- have silted in, and he says that it's an exempt thing. You're not actually working within the gradient boundary; it's all dry ground. It's solid rock bottom, and it's just removing some -- some silted areas that don't have anything to do with necessary -- necessitating any kind of a permit. And I would like for us to do that, and I have Ray Garcia lined up to help tie a chain onto a plug, and Road and Bridge can take a loader and pull the plug to drain it. It will take approximately two weeks for it to drain down to what the normal gradient boundary of the river was before the dam was built. It doesn't dry up completely; still leaves the channels and everything so the fish can survive, or some of them, whatever, don't go through the hole in the dam, go downstream. io-22-0~ 92 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 And Leonard tells me that he will notify the City of Kerrville, let them know that we're doing this so if they have any kind of increased flow, whatever, because of that -- because city drinking water does come out of the river. Put them on notice that that is -- that will happen if the Court approves it. And also, I will see to it that we put adequate advertising out so people are aware that it is going to happen. Also, put up warning signs on the dam, keep people from getting anywhere near the drain, so that we don't have somebody get hurt or killed, and have a few flyers that we can put out around the area, make people aware that we need to do this. I think there's a little bit of maintenance that needs to be done with the last survey by the company that just got through X-raying the dam. There's very little, but there's a little bit of maintenance. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've got a report that just came in. I'll read it. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just flew in your door? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just came in over the transmitter. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What does it say? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We are putting -- this -- it's dated today from Stefan Schuster of Freese and Nichols. We are putting the final touches on our report for the NDT testing of the Kerr County dams. Report should be complete io-zz-o~ 93 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 by the end of this week. We will schedule a presentation to Commissioners Court in the next few weeks. Generally, there are voids present at both dams, with up to 20 percent of the decks having some cavity beneath them. Our report will provide an overview of the investigation and make recommendations for a repair plan. If you have any questions, give me a call. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, this would be a good time to do it. That way the water level will be down, and whatever repairs need to be done can be done while it's drained. COMMISSIONER LETZ: When were you planning to do this? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: End of this month, first of November. And leaving it -- it's going to take a while once it drains for all that silt to dry out enough to be able to handle it to move it out of there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only question would be to make sure that we don't do it -- make sure we have that plan in place prior to doing it, because we don't want to -- I mean, and I suspect that may take a little bit of time to develop a design and a plan for filling that up. I mean, I -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I believe that this will be -- you know, it will be drained for two to three months. io-22-0~ 94 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He says we'll deliver the report and presentation to the Court in the next few days. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And if it works out to where we can have it repaired at the same time, we can do some other little maintenance that needs to be done in-house. And -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think if we're going to drain it, we need to do the maintenance. We need to fix it now if we're going to fix it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we run -- Bruce, do we run into any desilting or dewatering of the silt problems, or is that part of the permit process that we don't need to go through? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He tells me that we're exempt from the permit process when doing that. I talked to him three weeks ago, and I -- he said what he would like to have is a copy of the court order, and I assured him that he could have that. As well as -- or I will give him the -- the flyer that I intend to put out to put notice -- you know, residents on notice that it's going to happen, as well as newspaper articles that reference that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- I think we need to get it in writing from them, because I know Parks and Wildlife hammered Bandera County when they drained their lake to-zz-o~ 95 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to take some gravel out. They made them put it all back. I think we need to get this in writing. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We're not taking out any gravel. We're not working in the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And that's probably the reason. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We're in the gradient boundary. We're actually up on the bank, and I told him the whole story. We're not removing the gravel from areas within the -- the gradient boundary. We're only removing silt from up on the -- or the residents will be removing silt. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you're not going to do any cleaning? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If there's anything to be done at all, it will be minor, right around the boat dock, or if there's a boulder or tree or something that's washed in there that needs to be taken out. But the County's exposure to this and cost is almost nothing, 'cause I don't intend for the County to be working on anybody's private property. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't think that's a good idea. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just don't understand why you don't wait till June to do this. io-zz-o~ 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 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand perfectly why we don't. I think you did that once. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tried it. It didn't work real well. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Doesn't work during the time of spawn either. MR. EMERSON: Just one issue. When you're talking to all the private property owners, you might remind them that because they're operating within the floodplain area, they're looking at permits to go in there and clean their property out. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Some of that is floodplain and some of it really isn't. The dam created a -- a reservoir, and a lot of that land was not in the floodplain prior to the dam being built. MR. EMERSON: If it's in the floodplain map, and if they go in and make any changes, they need a permit. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. Well, I will -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not as easy as it used to be. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I will check that out as well and make sure that the landowners know what they have to do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: You also might make sure that U.G.R.A.'s in that loop of timing and aware of it all. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. MR. ODOM: Also a suggestion, that maybe we have a io-za-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 97 firm date, plus or minus, of when we close it again. Are we going to leave it for Christmas? You know, what it would -- middle of December, plus or minus, in there? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's a hard thing to know to get a permanent time -- or a set time, because we don't know what the weather's going to do. And if it's going to rain between now and then, it takes a while for that silt to dewater. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And we've also had it drained before, and we got a flood and it filled it back up, and it had to drain back down again, and so there's a lot of unknowns. But I would say the target date to close it back up would be right before the end of the year. MR. ODOM: Before Christmas or New Year's? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Before New Year's. MR. ODOM: Before New Year's? (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: You going to put the plug back in before New Year's? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Would like to. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we're not going to do it until the end of the month, so we're only going to have two months, and you say it will take two months to dry. There's no way to have it done before then. Really, the first of io-22-0~ 98 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 February at the earliest. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We need to have it back in before the first of February, 'cause that's when the bass start spawning; that's when you get in trouble with the bass club. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've done this before, haven't we? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Been there, done that. Just like Buster drained it one year in June. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We drained Flat Rock one year too, and screwed up the spawning too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm certainly in favor of doing it, but we ought to try to -- doesn't cost that much if we have to do it again. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not a hard thing to do. (Discussion off the record.) COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just make sure everyone -- there's all -- you know, as long as all permits are done and we have sign-off by everybody, I have no problem with it. JUDGE TINLEY: We need any action by the Court at this point? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think at some point we have to authorize Road and Bridge to do it, for Road and Bridge and our volunteer from Environmental Health. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Be sure you get Ray out of io-22-0~ 99 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 __ the water before you pull the plug, will you? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I told Ray we would get him out of the water in plenty of time before they pulled the plug. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are we going to use your new piece of machinery, Leonard? MR. ODOM: Pardon me? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nevermind. I asked if you were going to use your new machine to pull the plug. MR. ODOM: Just a loader and cable, that's all I need. It will float like a car. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion -- you make a motion if you want. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move that we -- that we -- thank you; it is my precinct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He just remembered. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move that we authorize the draining of Ingram Lake, and that the time frame be between the end of October and no later than the first of February to be refilled. i 'i COMMISSIONER LETZ: 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.) io-aa-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 25 100 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Item 16, set a date and time for a workshop on long-range planning improvements, maintenance, et cetera, for the county parks. Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I put on this on because there seems to be some questions with respect to parks and recreation and maintenance and improvements, and section one, section two of Flat Rock Lake -Park, a bridge, when we're going to open up the park. We got a ton of issues, and so I thought it might be a good time to have a workshop. Also, the Court will remember that we updated the Parks and Recreation master plan, and it extends to 2008, so it's probably time to take a look at all that, and I would suggest we have a workshop on that, maybe in the afternoon of the first meeting in November, if that meets with the pleasure of the Court. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, it will take a while to digest all this. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does. That's the reason I gave it to you early. COMMISSIONER LETZ: When do you want to do it? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's that date, Judge? JUDGE TINLEY: November the 12th. io-zz-o~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 102 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Monday. JUDGE TINLEY: Monday, the 19th -- well, wait a I minute. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it would be the 26th. November 26th. Thanksgiving is the 22nd. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, it's real early this year. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. That's my birthday. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thanksgiving? Or -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, sometimes it's on Thanksgiving. This year it's -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good, we're going to give you a big turkey. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, thank you. I just don't want to be the one being fried. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The 26th at 1:30. JUDGE TINLEY: 1:30. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 26th at 1:30. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a motion. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to have a parks workshop at 1:30 on November the 26th, 2007. Any question or discussion on the motion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just one other comment. I'll ask Jody to provide copies of that master plan to io-zz-o~ 103 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 anybody that needs it; i.e., Maintenance, Road and Bridge, others who have concerns or assist us in the park. Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to Item 17; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to set a public hearing for the revision of the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and regulations. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think everyone received a copy of a draft that I put together. I went through -- well, let me first go back -- this is all -- the main part of this is because of some requirements by Water Development Board to adopt some of their standards and their model rules into our rules. I went back and looked through the letter received from the Water Development Board, and how they thought we could do it. Then I looked at Rex's, a little bit longer, how he thinks that we -- he thought we should do it. Then I worked on this thing, and then. I decided to do it my way. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm shocked and surprised. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The:-- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Shock and awe. io-z2-o~ 104 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, shock and awe. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I actually kind of went back to what the Water Development Board recommended originally, and this is not contrary to Rex, just a different approach, or different than I originally talked about. It became very difficult to edit our current rules and not miss something, though we did have to -- I did have to do that some. So, what I really did, I took the model rules and added them in, Section 5.09. And I want to go through these real quickly, but that's kind of how we got all that in here, and then I'm going to go through real quickly and go over those changes and a few others. They're not -- most of the other ones are not huge or real significant. On Page 7 -- JUDGE TINLEY: Are we just setting a public hearing? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what it says. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're setting a public hearing, but to set the public hearing, I think y'all need to know what we're setting the public hearing on. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. MR. EMERSON: As long as you don't go into detail. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That took care of that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Letz, let me ask you a question. These darkened areas -- io-22-0~ 105 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are changes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- are the changes. And they're throughout this entire book, I see, but I don't know what the changes are. Like, when I turn to Page 29, how do I know what the -- what has been and what's going to be? COMMISSIONER LETZ: The majority of the changes are new language completely; it's additional language that we did not have. There's a big section, -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 5.09. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 5.09, 13 pages long, that is new language completely. What the basic changes are to do this that I'm recommending is, at least when we have the public hearing, we make one big change and say individual water wells -- to have an individual -- individual water well, you have to be greater than 5 acres, instead of 5 acres or greater. That's a very minor change, but what the reason for that is, the new language to adopt covers everything 5 acres and smaller. And that's what the basic part of the changes are here, and you can see them, you know, as you're going through the document. JUDGE TINLEY: Dealing with model rules, you're talking about? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Model rules essentially talk io-22-0~ 106 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 little more detail after everyone has time to read them. I think we set the public hearing today. JUDGE TINLEY: When do you want that public hearing? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thirty days from -- this requires 30 days, correct, Rex? Subdivision rule modification? Where does that put us? I don't have a calendar. JUDGE TINLEY: 26th.. November the 26th? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Public hearing -- yeah, put it on for public hearing on the Subdivision Rules for the 26th of November. At 10 a.m.? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question, more directed to the County Attorney. Can we also put approval on the same agenda, behind the public hearing? We can, can we not? MR. EMERSON: I think so. Because -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Because we do have kind of a time issue here with Water Development Board. We hope to be on their agenda for consideration in the December meeting, which means we need to get the last piece in place in November. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I will -- yeah. And I will put this on the next agenda, possibly as a workshop format, so that we can go through the changes that need to be made. THE CLERK: You have a motion. 10-22-0~ 107 1 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: That's what I thought. We don't have a second. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: We do now. I have a motion and second. Any question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. We'll move to Item 18; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to adopt a resolution regarding the 2008 Kerr County resolutions for Indigent Defense Grant program. This was put on at the request of the Auditor. I assume this has to do with our ability to get what reimbursement we manage to get? MS. HARGIS: Just a formality. JUDGE TINLEY: Hmm? MS. HARGIS: Just a formality. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval. Question or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When you -- this is to be io-22-0~ 108 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 reimbursed for moneys that we've spent on defense. Who -- who reimburses us? Who's this go to? JUDGE TINLEY: Criminal Justice Division. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Governor's office? And is it federal money that just comes -- comes down to them, block grant type things? MS. HARGIS: No, you have to send in -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. MS. HARGIS: -- certification. We have to send in quarterly reports. But it requires that upon granting you the grant, that you have a resolution accepting the grant. That's all you're doing at this point. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Second -- third. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: These are not federal funds; these are state funds, right? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, some -- they may be federal funds flowing through the state. There's a lot of that that goes on with some of these programs. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It will be -- JUDGE TINLEY: State administers them. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is this after we reach a certain percentage and we run out of money, basically? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Like Indigent Health care. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's not. What I gather, that's not the case. io-a2-o~ 109 1 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: No, I don't think that's the case. MS. HARGIS: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What I do know about this, though, is it's our money that we have sent to Washington and Austin, and now we're begging to have some of our own money back. JUDGE TINLEY: After the appropriate administrative costs have been deducted. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Do we need knee pads for this? (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a different grant. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Keep a few votive candles available. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. I didn't see any items on the agenda requiring closed or executive session. We'll move to payment of the bills. to-a2-o~ 110 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to make a motion, Judge, that we pay our bills. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second that motion. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion and second to pay the bills. Any questions or discussion? Speaking of the indigent health care, I noted that this was a banner pay period for those providing health care to those. qualifying under the indigent program, for a mere -- just under $83,000 this period. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh my gosh. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I just -- I think I know the answer, but I want to ask Rex about the -- about the public service DVD shoot. MR. EMERSON: I'm sorry, what? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: On your bills, Sunset Entertainment. MR. EMERSON: That's not what it appears to be. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I just thought it might generate a little discussion. MR. EMERSON: That was under the new legislative authority that requires that. We cannot talk to any defendants prior to a written waiver of their right to counsel. Okay, there's very specific rules that were put in place, and what we did was, in County Court at Law, we have a io-22-0~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 111 they choose to waive or not waive right of access to an attorney to be able to talk to the prosecutor's office that day, and tells them that if they do not waive, they'll be reset for a minimum of ten days pursuant to statute to allow us to talk to them. After the ten days, it's presumed that they've had an opportunity to consult with counsel and talk to them. The second part of the video is a reshoot of the original video that I shot in 1998. Statutes have changed a little bit since then, and a lot of the probation terms are different, and we updated the video. Otherwise, what happens is every single person that comes to the table, we have to sit there and go through every single term of probation with them, and this way we can show it to everybody that waives their right to counsel, and they're advised of all the probation terms and conditions in one shot. So, it allows for the efficiency of the court. We spend a little bit of money up front, but we can move a whole lot more cases. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay, that's fine. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Only other one I have is on io-zz-o~ 112 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 reimbursement mileage to Becky Henderson. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I saw that. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Item 12 -- Page 12. Didn't we deny one of those last month? Or did we? JUDGE TINLEY: We didn't actually deny it, but I think we went on record as -- that was specifically in-county mileage, the one last month. MS. HARGIS: That one was the Ag Extension Service, and -- and that one should have been done. COMMISSIONER LETZ: This one -- MS. HARGIS: This one, I -- I haven't had any discussion with them on this one, so I can't -- MR. EMERSON: I might be able to shed a little bit of light. It's my understanding -- because I went up to go see her, and she was gone. It's my understanding that she accompanied the District Judges, specifically Judge Ables as Senior Administrative Judge, and she is his coordinator, to the Judge's conference, and she was responsible for some activities at the conference. I don't know if that's the specific bill, but I know she traveled. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) io-zz-o~ 113 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Budget amendments. The Auditor's provided us with a summary sheet of all of those. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We shouldn't see any more of these for a while, should we? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Shouldn't. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the end of '06-'07. MS. HARGIS: It should be -- there are still a few, like the training that Eva received that was actually contracted for in September. That's about $1,500. We should have all the electric bills and things, water bills, things of that nature. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything that gets accrued. MS. HARGIS: Sometimes you have to wait almost till the end of the month, though. Usually 30 days it takes to wash those out. But we do check most of those, 'cause if we don't, the auditors will pick them up. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval to pay these little darlings. JUDGE TINLEY: And approval of the budget amendments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: As shown on the summary? io-zz-o~ 114 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the budget amendments as per the summary. 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 have any late bills? MS. HARGIS: No, sir. We don't have them any more. JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly reports for Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2; County Clerk, General and Trust Fund; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1; and Constable, Precinct 3. Do I hear a motion that these reports be approved as presented? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the reports as presented. 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. io-zz-o~ 115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Any member of the Court have any report with regard to their liaison or committee assignments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. Actually, wait, wait, wait. I understand Buzzie's is supposed to be open pretty soon. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Like today? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, not like today at all, but soon. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Z have a -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one quickie. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I attended the Alamo Workforce annual awards luncheon in San Antonio on the 16th, and Mooney Aircraft -- Mooney Airplane Company was given an award, a large, big award for excellence in training and so forth and so on with respect to the way they handle their employees. F.Y.I. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex, question kind of for you to think about. When Chuck Bickerstaff was here talking about legislative changes a couple weeks ago, he made a comment about a requirement that we do a takings assessment with Subdivision Rules, and that, I believe, has to go -- or should go kind of in concert with it. Can you check as to io-zz-o~ 116 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 what we need to do on that takings provision, as it being -- and the state law that was passed several years ago about takings, it's a requirement of that law, and that we -- it's fairly -- a procedural thing, but something that we need to have on record, and we need to make sure that if that's correct, that we do that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I remember a couple of years ago, when you used the word "takings," it was in reference to, like, eminent domain and things like that. Is that where we are? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's where we are, yeah. 'Cause -- and, you know, my recollection from Chuck Bickerstaff's comment was that our rules obviously are affecting property, and that if there's something there that says that we're -- that they -- our rules constitute a taking, we need to look at them from that standpoint and make a determination that they are or aren't. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got his phone number, if you -- is that how you're talking? You want him to contact -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I want him -- I just want him to find out if we can do this. MR. EMERSON: I have a copy of the transcript from that workshop that y'all did. I just haven't finished reading it, so I'll skip through and find that section, look io-2z-o~ 117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, goodness. Liaison people that have never been in compliance with some of our rules and regulations. Environmental Health is probably the largest change that we're going to see for a long time. Ray is developing some office policies and procedures, as well as he is going to start holding the designers'/installers' feet to the fire on following the rules and the procedures to require permits to construct, as well as getting permits to operate. The main reason that they have been so -- or so far behind in their recordkeeping is because of some installers getting preferential treatment from years past, and have not completed the process so that people can get a permit to operate systems they have paid money for. And he is going to have the policies -- office policies to where everybody follows the same rules, and it's way overdue, and I believe that he is strong enough and determined enough to make it stick. And that some of the -- I think some of us may be getting calls from some of these installers who have received io-zz-o~ 118 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 special treatment in the past, and I think we need to be sure and listen to both sides of the story and make sure that we don't negate our own rules. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's amazing about it is that they -- they receive special treatment here -- here, but they don't in the other counties that they do business in. The surrounding counties, they play by the letter of the law, and here we do a lot of stuff for them, and they stay mad at us all the time for doing it -- or when we don't do it, that kind of thing. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So it has to be -- we have to get to a point to where we're all playing by the same rules. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I totally agree. And Ray -- I met with Ray the other day, and we had a long talk about these things, and he is -- he wants to do everything by the law and comply with everything so that we're not breaking our own law -- breaking state law, and I think it's a good thing. I'm glad he's where he is, and I think he's strong enough to see it through. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN_: Yeah. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We'd encourage him to do that, and encourage these installers that we all know to start playing by the rules and quit asking for special io-a2-o~ 119 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 treatment. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's it for me. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, if I could, he mentioned Ag Barn, and that brought up something that I forgot to bring up on Ag Barn. I got with Ms. Hargis a week or so ago about the request for services proposal, or RFP for services for the design aspect. That has been published, and while Bruce is up in the far northwest, you know, playing, I'l1 be working for the taxpayers, meeting with them on October -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh my god. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That was a low blow. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was. COMMISSIONER LETZ: On October 31st, I'l1 be meeting with anyone who's interested in submitting a proposal, if they choose. It's not a requirement to meet, but to kind of go over the concept out there that Bruce and I are in agreement needs to be done. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We won't mention all the times that Mr. Letz has been unavailable whenever I've taken care of his duties for him. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, with -- JUDGE TINLEY: We're not going to mention those? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, we're not going to mention those. io-2a-o~ 120 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, anyway -- but I know we've had some inquiries; I've talked to several people about that already, and anyone that you all know in the community, it's a relatively simple RFP. And we will need to -- at our next agenda, we'll put on there as a -- the process to really review them a little bit. We really haven't gone over that, but they will be due -- right before the next meeting? First meeting in November. MS. HARGIS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right before there. So, we can kind of have them back, and then we can decide the review process at that meeting and go over them. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I might say that back when my children were the age of Mr. Letz's children, we didn't get to go to the Pacific northwest either. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That means he won't be going along with you? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't believe so. JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any reports from elected officials or department heads? MS. HARGIS: I would like -- I have a couple of things. First of all, I received the bids for the audit. They're not opened, but we do -- and I didn't get it on the agenda. And we have the award of the contract for the ag -- you know, that Roy Walston didn't get, and then also the 10-22-0~ 121 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 insurance, so it's -- I was kind of wondering if we could have a special meeting. JUDGE TINLEY: The question I was going to propound to Mr. Emerson -- I don't know what it's going to take in terms of time for him to understand what he needs to understand. One possibility could be as early as 2 o'clock this afternoon. Is there any possibility you'd be in a position to give us a response with regard to the employee health benefits program? MR. EMERSON: No. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, solves that issue. What you're looking at is a special meeting for these various items next week or so? MS. HARGIS: 'Cause we really need to award the bid for the audit. I did get two; one that I had -- one company I've never heard of, but -- so we have two. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can do a special meeting next week. MS. HARGIS: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER you open those bids any MS. HARGIS: COMMISSIONER Yeah. LETZ: Next Monday. BALDWIN: Why don't you -- why don't ~ then negotiate? No, I don't think so. BALDWIN: What do you mean, you don't 25 I think so? io-zz-o~ 122 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. HARGIS: Because this is not insurance. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I really don't get it. I don't get it. But -- MS. HARGIS: I'm not -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- I'm proud of you. I am so proud of you. MS. HARGIS: I'm not. an attorney. I will stay out of that one. I do not -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good thing. MS. HARGIS: That's right. In my bid process, I don't open them, and I do need permission. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, initially they have to come to the Court for opening, anyway. MS. HARGIS: Right. And then we can -- we can negotiate, because their services -- I think once we do open them, because you're going to get estimates, but they have to be awarded, is my understanding. We have to award them. JUDGE TINLEY: You're going to bring us RFQ's, not RFP's. MS. HARGIS: RFQ's. JUDGE TINLEY: We'll go ahead and get a meeting set up. MS. HARGIS: And then put Roy's on there so you can award that one, at least those two things. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can talk to Bruce today; we to-2z-o~ 123 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 can figure out the process for the other one too, so we can get that going too. MS. HARGIS: Okay. I would appreciate it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. EMERSON: If I could elaborate, Judge, what I did was ask Mr. Looney to forward to me in writing proof of the notice that went out for the RFP's, and then as well a written chronology of events that occurred. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. EMERSON: And then at that point, I'll sit down and evaluate it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay, good enough. So, we don't need to recess; we can adjourn. MS. HARGIS: What day do you want next week? JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know yet. We'll let you know. (Commissioners Court was adjourned at 11:46 a.m.) io-a2-o~ 124 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF KERR The above and foregoing is a true and complete transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 25th day of October, 2007. JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk B Y : GGY~- - --- Kathy B ik, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter io-a2-o~ ORDER NO.3 0 5 72 RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF VETERANS AND VETERAN'S DAY, 2007 Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Adopt Resolution in support of veterans and Veteran's Day, 2007, as requested by Kerrville American Legion Post 208. ORDER NO.3 0 5 73 2007-2008 KERB COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Adopt the 2007-2008 Kerr County Community Plan for submission to the Alamo Area Council of Governments. ORDER NO. 30574 APPOINTMENT OF ELECTION JUDGES AND ALTERNATES Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioners Letz/Williams. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve the appointment of Election Judges and Alternates for the term of one (1) year in accordance with the Texas Election Code Section 32: Early Voting Ballot Board Larry Cornett, Judge Andrew Bachofen, Alt. Bev Avery, Clerk Michele Schneider, Clerk Central Accumulator Station Linda Bowman, Tabulator Sup Barbara Young, Assist. Tab. Sup. Michele Schneider, Presiding Judge Nadene Alford, Manager Cheryl Thompson, Clerk Ed Nemec, Clerk Dot Larimer, Clerk Eva Washburn, Clerk ORDER NO. 30575 CONSOLIDATION OF CELLULAR TELEPHONE CONTRACTS Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Authorize Mr. Trolinger to proceed with consolidating cell phone contract for all County employees, except the Sheriffs Department, and bring the contract back to the Court for approval. ORDER NO.30576 KERRVILLE CHRISTMAS LIGHTING CORPORATION ASSISTING WITH ELECTRICAL UPGRADES AT COURTHOUSE Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve paying one-half the cost of the electrical upgrade at the Courthouse, with the determination of funding source to be worked out between the Maintenance Director and the Auditor. ORDER NO.30577 UPGRADE BROADBAND INTERNET SERVICES WITH TIME WARNER CABLE Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve updating the broadband Internet services agreement with Time Warner Cable, and authorize the County Judge to sign same. ORDER NO.30578 REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOT 67 OF CYPRESS SPRINGS ESTATES PHASE 2, SECTION ONE Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve setting a public hearing for November 26, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. for the revision of plat, Lot 67 of Cypress Springs Estates Phase 2, Section One, Vol. 7, Page 172, Pct. 4. ORDER NO. 30579 AMEND COURT ORDER #30504 TO USE FUND 20 TO PURCHASE EXCAVATOR Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Amend Court Order #30504 to use Fund 20 to purchase a used excavator. ORDER NO.30580 VACATE AND DISCONTINUE ROAD FOR PART OF UPPER TURTLE CREEK ROAD Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve posting the Affidavit of Posting Notice of Petition to vacate, abandon and discontinue road for part of Upper Turtle Creek Road. ORDER NO. 30581 DECLARE NOVEMBER, 2007 HOME CARE AND HOSPICE MONTH Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve request from Texas Association for Home Care to declare November, 2007, as Home Care and Hospice Month in Kerr County. ORDER NO. 30582 APPROVE CONTRACTS WITH VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENTS AND COUNTY SPONSORED ENTITIES Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve the contracts with the Volunteer Fire Departments and County Sponsored Entities as follows, and authorize the County Judge to sign same: Kerr Economic Development Foundation Big Brothers and Sisters K'Star Divide Volunteer Fire Department Mountain Home Volunteer Fire Department Center Point Volunteer Fire Department Hunt Volunteer Fire Department Comfort Volunteer Fire Department Elm Pass Volunteer Fire Department Ingram Volunteer Fire Department Castle Lake Volunteer Fire Department Tierra Linda Volunteer Fire Department ORDER NO. 30583 DRAINING OF INGRAM LAKE Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Authorize draining of Ingram Lake with the time frame to be between the end of October and no later than the 1st of February to be refilled. ORDER NO.30584 WORKSHOP FOR COUNTY PARKS Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Set a workshop for November 26, 2007 at 1:30 p.m. for long-range planning, improvements, maintenance, etc. for county parks. ORDER NO.30585 KERR COUNTY SUBDIVISION RULES AND REGULATIONS Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioners Baldwin/Williams. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Set a Public Hearing for November 26, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. for the revision of the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations. ORDER NO. 30586 2008 RESOLUTION FOR INDIGENT DEFENSE GRANT PROGRAM Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Adopt the 2008 Kerr County Resolution for the Indigent Defense Grant Program. ORDER NO. 30587 CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, came to be considered by the Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are: Accounts Expense 10-General Fund $ 258,579.89 14-Fire Protection $ 7,569.50 15-Road & Bridge $ 82,335.45 18-County Law Library $ 1,210.14 26-JP Technology $ 2,825.00 31-Parks $ 5,918.76 35-JPO Grant G $ 1,728.50 50-Indigent Health Care $ 82,749.32 76-Juv Detention Facility $ 11,035.00 TOTAL $ 453,951.56 Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts. ORDER NO.30588 BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBERS 1 THROUGH 30 Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve the Budget Amendments as per the Summary presented. ORDER NO. 30589 MONTHLY REPORTS Came to be heard this the 22nd day of October, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 the following monthly reports: JP #4 JP #2 County Clerk -General and Trust Fund JP # 1 Constable Precinct 3