1
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, February 25, 2008
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
v
00
0
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
February 25, 2008
PAGE
---	Visitors' Input		5
---	Commissioners' Co	mments	9
1.1	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to	
	approve use of th	e District Courtroom for the	
	Republican Party	County Convention on March 29,	
	2008, from 8 a.m.	to 3 p.m.	11
1.2	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to	
	abandon, vacate,	and discontinue a 15-foot	
	reserve strip and	the portion of Church Street	
	that lies within	the Tomm property; set public	
	hearing for same		12
1.3	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to name	
	a private road in	accordance with 911 Guidelines	20
1.4	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action for	
	final revision of	plat for Lots 14-18 of Solar	
	Village		21
1.5	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to	
	approve Road and	Bridge Vehicle Policy	23
1.8	Open bids for ele	ctrical, plumbing, HVAC, and	
	pest control		32
1.6	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action for	
	final revision of	plat for Lots 5A & 5B, Grotto	
	Springs Ranch I		33
1.7	Consider/discuss,	accept Kerr County Sheriff's	
	Office 2007 Racia	l Profiling Report	34
1.9	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action to	
	appoint members t	o joint County/City committees	
	to look at issues	related to library, health	
	benefits, Road an	d Bridge, EMS, broadband services,	
	ETJ, dispatch, an	imal control, fire services, and	
	reverse 911 servi	ces	35,
			55
1.10	Consider/discuss,	take appropriate action on	
	giving notice to	City of Kerrville concerning	
	problems with the	ETJ agreement for subdivisions	44
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)	
	February 25, 2008	
		PAGE
l.ll	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on	
	request from Hill Country Council on Alcohol and	
	Drug Abuse to have County Judge sign a memorandum	
	of understanding so they may apply for funding	
	with Department of State Health Services	49
1.12	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
	authorize Human Resources Department to seek	
	application for open position of department head	
	for Court Compliance Department (Executive Session)	--
1.13	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to give	
	a merit raise to Nona Tucker (Executive Session)	--
3.1	Action as may be required on matters discussed	
	in executive session	53
4.1	Pay Bills	72
4.2	Budget Amendments	--
4.3	Late Bills	--
4.4	Approve and Accept Monthly Reports	72
5.1	Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee	
	Assignments	73
1.14	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action	
	regarding an order to authorize issuance of	
	tax notes	85
---	Adjourned	99
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, February 25, 2008, 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: Let me call to order this regular
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court posted and
scheduled for this time and date, Monday, February 25th,
2008, at 9 a.m. It is that time now. If you would, please
stand and join me in a moment of prayer, followed by the
pledge of allegiance.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. At this time,
if there's any member of the audience or the public that
wishes to be heard with respect to any item that is not a
listed or posted agenda item, feel free to come forward at
this time. If you wish to be heard on any item that is a
listed agenda item, we'd ask that you wait until that item is
called, and we would prefer that you fill out a participation
form that's located at the back of the room. That helps me
to be sure to not skip over that agenda item without giving
~~, you the opportunity to be heard. If, for some reason, we
come to an agenda item that you wish to be heard on and you
haven't filled out a participation form, get my attention in
2-25-08
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
some manner and I'll give you the opportunity to be heard.
Come forward, and give us your name and address.
MS. ENGLE: My name is Karen Engle and I live at
3310 Riverside Drive. I come in here on February 11th, and I
was issue number one; it was about animal control and my dog.
Since then, I've gone to court for my ticket. I want to show
you some pictures of my dog, and y'all need to see them, what
my dogs looks like. This dog has been mistaken for a pit
bull by Animal Control for quite some time. These are
pictures of my dog, okay? My dog is not a hateful, rude dog.
My dog was not raised to fight. He was not raised to bite.
He was not raised to be aggressive unless he was aggressed
upon, or anybody was aggressing on me. He is for my
protection. I left San Antonio several years ago and was
under protection from a bad divorce. And when I left -- this
is the -- this was a puppy that I bottle-fed, okay? I
bottle-fed this puppy. This dog is not aggressive,
regardless of what Animal Control says. Yeah, when Animal
Control's coming at him with a pole with a loop on the end
and strangling him and dragging him to a truck, he's going to
be aggressive. I would. Wouldn't you, if somebody was
coming at you with a pole with a loop on it and putting it
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
6
around your neck and dragging you to a truck? Because you're
running around?
My dog's been taken in three times. That's it,
three times. And brought to my house one time. I have
signed three papers getting him out of Animal Control, and
that's it. She stated that -- last time she was here that
she had dealt with me on more than five occasions, or five or
more occasions. That is not true. She's not telling me the
truth. She also -- when I did go to court, I was sitting
next to a lady -- because I can't afford to pay for this
ticket. Do you know how much these tickets are, just by
chance? Does any -- do y'all -- all of you know? This
ticket is now $264, okay? I make $700, $800 a month. That's
it. I don't have the money to pay for this, so I'm going to
have to do community service to take care of this ticket.
Because Janie called ahead to the prosecuting attorney and
told her under no -- under no circumstances let me out of
this ticket; that she has dealt with my dog several times,
that my dog is a nuisance to the public, that under no
circumstances should she let me out of this ticket.
Because my dog had gotten out of a broken window.
I had a broken window in my house, and he had gotten out, and
she had let me out of the first ticket. This time there was
no talking to her, because Janie had already called ahead to
talk to her, and -- and told her that I came and filed a
2-25-08
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
complaint here, and there was no budging her at all. She was
firm. Janie has got her set; I am not going to get out of
this ticket. While I was sitting there waiting for my
paperwork to come through, I was sitting next to a lady, and
the lady -- I said, "What are you here for?" "I had a dog at
large." "Oh, really? Me too. How much is your ticket?"
Hers was, like, 160-something, because it was from last year,
and the rates went up this year, okay? Her daughter just had
open-heart surgery, and her dog was sitting on her front
porch while she was away from the house. Her dog lifts the
latch off the gate and goes and sits on the front porch,
'cause that's where he likes to be. Janie removed her dog
from her front porch, just like they did mine, except they
didn't dart that dog. Okay? This lady is going to have to
pay it out, because her daughter had open-heart surgery.
She's going to have to pay out her ticket too however she can
too.
This isn't just about me. It's about everybody
that -- that these people are ticketing. I think that Animal
Control has a ticket book in their hand, and I think they're
abusing it. I think they're taking their authority way too
far. I think that if you impound a dog, charge an impound
fee to get him out, sure, but these tickets are ridiculous.
These tickets are not right. You know, I live in a
neighborhood that has ten houses, a park, the Ag Barn, and
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
8
across the river is a state park. I am not in a
well-populated area. I don't deserve this treatment from
Animal Control board, at all. At all. I think that she has
just come at me with a vengeance. Most people that I've
talked to that have had to deal with Animal Control board do
not want to deal with Janie. Even the people that -- I don't
know how much time I have, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, you should be reasonable in
your time.
MS. ENGLE: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: You probably already have taken more
time than is normal.
MS. ENGLE: I'm sorry, sir. I'm real upset about
this issue, okay? Most people that I've talked to have said
that they do not like dealing with her, even the people that
she gets her dogs from -- the people that take in her dogs
from the Animal Control, to -- to adopt them out don't even
like dealing with her because she's so rude, okay? I think
that they need to focus on wildlife that's out there, rabid
animals, things that are attacking other things, and leave
the public alone, really. This is has gone way too far. And
I take my dog to the park once a day and I run that dog.
That dog loves to run, and that's the only time he is off his
lead or out of my house. And he runs to the park with me
while I drive, and he runs back and he gets on my porch, and
2-25-08
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
we go inside. Occasionally he gets loose, but I don't think
that I deserve these tickets and treatment that I've gotten
from Animal Control board.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Engle. Because of
the styling of the matter in the visitors' input, we're
unable to --
MS. ENGLE: I know that.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- unable to respond in any manner.
So, your items are up here. We'll get them back to you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, tell her about when
you come at me with that pole and that loop on the end of it.
(Laughter.)
MS. ENGLE: Do you like it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I don't.
MS. ENGLE: Well, I don't like it either. I
wouldn't want --
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Baldwin, other than the
pole and the loop, what do you have for us?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I was -- that upset me
so much, I can't talk about it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll pass, Judge.
MR. GONZALES: Could I have five minutes of your
time, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sorry?
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
MS. ENGLE: He's on my sheet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is this the same issue?
MS. ENGLE: Yes.
MR. GONZALES: Yes, sir, but I've got other things
to say.
JUDGE TINLEY: This is the same issue?
MR. GONZALES: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, sir, you may not. Thank you.
Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I want to briefly mention one
item, because there's a lot of people in the audience that --
some of them are interested in it. We're going to be
scheduling a workshop later today, at the end of the meeting,
related to O.S.S.F., subdivision rules, County Attorney's
office, kind of as to how we're working through some of our
new rules, partly related to some issues with -- I guess some
opinions received as to what needs to go through
Environmental Health, and also go over some of the new
requirements on small-acreage lots that we adopted under the
Texas Water Development Board model rules, kind of explain to
everyone. I think there's some confusion about how all that
works, but that'll be set up a little bit later in the
meeting, but I just wanted to let people know it's coming up.
That's it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't have anything, other
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11
than please don't burn anything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ditto that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Be careful when you set up --
tomorrow's going to be another real windy day, and it's real
dry. We hope we won't have any more fires.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think it's supposed to get windy
this afternoon and continue on through tomorrow, so be
careful. Pay attention. Okay, let's move on with our
agenda. The first item on the agenda is to consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to approve the use of
the district courtroom for the Republican Party county
convention on March 29th, 2008, from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. That
group has utilized the facility in the past for the
convention. This, I think, is something that has occurred --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Almost every year -- every
other year.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- every year within my memory
that -- that it's been an election year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? You
wish to be heard, Mr. Nemec?
MR. NEMEC: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or discussion?
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
MR. NEMEC: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 2, if we might.
Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to abandon,
vacate, and discontinue a 15-foot reserve strip and the
portion of Church Street that lies within the Tomm property
and set a public hearing for the same, that property being
located in Precinct 2.
MR. ODOM: There's presently a 15-foot reserve
strip filled in -- filed in Volume R, Page 212, that goes
from Swayze Street in Center Point to the river. It is
totally within Ms. Lynn Tomm's property. Church Street, a
County-maintained road, contains 157.68 feet into the
property and terminates. Ms. Tomm is asking the Court to
abandon, vacate, and discontinue both the easement and that
portion of Church Street past the Swayze Street intersection.
By doing this, it will make the three parcels totaling
6.5 acres a contiguous lot, and she can gate the entrance to
her property. Road and Bridge has no need for the reserve
strip and feels that the traffic flow would be safer without
2-25-08
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
the dead-end portion of the road. If this is agreeable with
the Court, we ask that you set a public hearing for
April 14th, 2008, at 10:10 a.m.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What date, again? Which --
April what?
MR. ODOM: April the -- excuse me -- 10th -- I mean
April the 14th.	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 14th.	
MR. ODOM: 2008, at 10:10.	
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move that we set	a public
hearing on the abandonment of the reserve strip -- 1	5-foot
reserve strip on the property by the -- held by the	Tomms in
Precinct 2, and set a public hearing for 4-14, April	14, at
10 a.m. in the morning.	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.	
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to	set a
public hearing on the matter for April 14, 2008, at	
10:10 a.m. Question or discussion on the motion?	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard?	
MR. ODOM: Yes?	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just something I'm	curious
about. This says it would be safer without the dead	-end
portion of the road.	
MR. ODOM: That's -- yes, sir.	
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It has to dead-end	
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
14
somewhere.
MR. ODOM: It dead-ends right at the river, Buster.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it goes all the way
to the river through this property, but Swayze Street comes
in and intersects with Church Street right at the -- at
the -- at what would be the south side of the property line
of these people's property, so the easement that goes all the
way to the river is no longer necessary.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MR. ODOM: And this used to be something in 1895.
My experience in Castroville was, that was an easement to get
people down to the water during droughts. Even -- we had
that in Castroville; the street beside me was mine, I
maintained it, but it would still allow people to get down to
the river for livestock.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I find it interesting, this
warranty deed that you gave us a copy of is dated from 1895,
and it's from a family called Williams to the McElroys.
McElroy is an old standing family in Center Point that held
that property for many years.
MR. ODOM: Many years.
JUDGE TINLEY: Question. The tract that's located
immediately east of -- the portion of Church Street that
extends into -- beyond Swayze Street and the 15-foot
easement, that's the Tomm property that we're talking about?
2-25-08
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
MR. ODOM: To the left and to the right, that would
be -- to the east she owns -- Ms. Tomm owns that to the east.
JUDGE TINLEY: What about -- what about the tract
that's described as 1.59-acre --
MR. ODOM: She also owns that also.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- to the west?
MR. ODOM: She owns that also.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, the same property owners
I both --
MR. ODOM: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- on the east and the west?
MR. ODOM: East and west on that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And north too, right?
MR. ODOM: And north too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All three -- well, there's
only one piece there.
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is this -- is this legal to
do this once it's been dedicated to the public?
MR. ODOM: Statutes say that you can name that
limit, and that really is -- I mean, we can maintain a road
10 feet if you wanted to. We'd only need a public hearing
for that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
2-25-08
1
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
MR. ODOM: We'll still maintain the road.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Won't be any road to
maintain in this case, because the road ends at their -- at
the south side of their property and takes a sharp left on
~I, Swayze and goes out to 480.
MR. ODOM: Goes out to 480. So, we're not cutting
', anybody off, that through traffic.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I don't see this is any
different than abandoning any road.
MR. ODOM: Any road.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there a requirement for a
petition to abandon this -- we're abandoning two things.
We're eliminating two things. One is an easement, and I
assume that's an easement for the public. And number two is
a portion of -- of Church Street that extended into there.
Does that require a petition, or do either of them require a
petition?
MR. EMERSON: Well, there's certain statutory
requirements for both of them, but the short answer would be,
since I don't have any information and don't know anything
about this particular issue, I'd rather look at it before I
fire off an answer.
MR. ODOM: May I clarify something, Judge? That to
the west, that property on the west, that 15-foot easement,
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
17
that belongs to that piece of land right there which Ms. Tomm
owns. It's not public. It's a private easement -- 15-foot
easement, so she owns that outright. The only thing is that
portion of the road, Swayze, that goes and dead-ends right
there, it brings -- it brings the street almost up to the old
house that was built in the 1800's.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the 15-foot easement was
granted to whom, for what purpose?
MR. ODOM: Was granted to that lot, that
1.59 acres. I don't know why, but that was the easement. Am
I correct, Ms. Tomms?
MS. TOMM: 1895. It was just from one landowner;
he just reserved 15 feet.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon?
MS. TOMM: It's in that -- there's -- did you get
the handwritten deed there?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Come identify yourself and
tell us --
MS. TOMM: I'm Lynn Tomm. And I -- do you have --
that handwritten deed, right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
MS. TOMM: And it states on there they reserved --
Mr. Williams reserved 15 feet off of that property. And
that's been like that now since 1895.
MR. ODOM: And since she owns that portion, as well
2-25-08
1
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
as the rest of the land, she just wants to eliminate the
whole thing.
MS. TOMM: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, I think
we're probably doing the right thing setting the public
hearing. I think Rex needs some time to look at this. The
road issue's pretty clear; we have the ability to abandon the
road. The easement, I think you probably need to do a little
bit of research as to who the easement is to. We may not
have any interest in that easement.
MR. ODOM: I don't think we do.
MS. TOMM: And the interesting thing is, the
easement is a 50-foot ravine, so I doubt that there's going
to be a lot of, you know, use of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the matter as to who
abandons the easement may be an issue. It may not be the
County's to abandon, but the road we clearly can abandon.
MR. ODOM: That portion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That little piece of Church
Street.
MS. TOMM: Would anyone have to abandon the
easement? I mean, these are going to be --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, whoever is the current holder
of the benefit under that easement. If -- if the easement
were reserved, which it obviously was, for the benefit of the
2-25-08
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
property owner that reserved the easement, --
MS. TOMM: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- whoever the successor in interest
to that property is, is probably the one that has the ability
to terminate that easement and surrender it, it would occur
to me. Now, that's something that I think Mr. Emerson needs
to take a look at.
MS. TOMM: A little genealogy, 113 years later, to
figure out --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I think our --
MS. TOMM: 'Cause that was sold -- the Williams'
sold it to the McElroys in 1895, so I don't -- I mean --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think all -- I mean, I'm
looking to Rex, only to tell me if the County has an interest
in abandoning that easement. The other -- if it's not the
County's to abandon, then you'll have to find an attorney to
tell you who it is. That's a civil matter at that point,
between you and whoever. But I think Rex can determine if
it's County interest -- if the County has an interest in that
easement or not.
MS. TOMM: How do I track who, after this --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's why you may need to get
an attorney, if -- if the County doesn't have the easement.
First step is, you need the public hearing, and let Rex --
MR. ODOM: We'll set the public hearing to abandon
2-25-08
1
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
this road.
MS. TOMM: The road, okay.
MR. ODOM: Let Rex -- if he has an opportunity to
look at this, for your -- I would assume if you sold it --
I'm not a lawyer, but I would assume if she sold it, in the
restrictions and covenants, she could negate that, could she
not?
MR. EMERSON: I'm not going to answer anything till
I see documents on it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably --
MR. ODOM: I still would like to set the public
hearing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: First step first.
MR. ODOM: First step first.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Set the public hearing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion
on the motion for a public hearing? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 3; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
name a private road in accordance with 911 guidelines.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. I don't know if we would
2-25-08
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
describe this as a road. It's existing. It's up in your
precinct; more of a driveway, but the address is 850 Sheppard
Rees, and Mike and Evelyn Hickey have asked to name this
private road Steepside. So, I ask the Court if they would
name that drive Steepside.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item as indicated. Any further
question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move
to Item 4; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for
final revision of plat for Lots 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18 of
Solar Village as set forth in Volume 4, Page 277, Plat
Records, and located in Precinct 1.
', MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The public hearing for this
revision was done January 14th, 2008. There are two homes on
~ five lots. Mr. Morgan owns Lots 14, 15, and 16. Mr. Riley
owns 17 and 18. The owners have revised the plat under the
alternate plat process to make two lots out of five. Lot 15B
will be 2.62 acres, and lot 17B will be 1.82 acres. Both
2-25-08
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
lots are served by a private water system. The roads are
dedicated. We ask that you approve the plat as presented.
There was a problem; O.S.S.F. was involved in it, and we
resolved that issue, and had to change Lot 18 to accommodate
that at that time. This was where the house was built over
the lot line, if you remember, up there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lot 18.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which is now part of 17B?
MR. ODOM: That's right. When we first presented
this, O.S.S.F. did not have enough time. When they looked at
it, they said they wanted that lot combined because of the
spray head or something like that, for septic system.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All the great minds have
gathered on this thing, and this is the best solution, and I
agree with it.
MR. ODOM: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on the
motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. And this is just a
point, so the rest of the Court remembers this when we have
our workshop on this topic. The question's come up, is it
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
23
appropriate -- the only reason there are buildings and
structures on this final plat is because it's an alternate
plat process, to go through quickly. Ordinarily, it's a --
we think it's a bad policy to put these things on final
i
plats. So, we need to figure out how we're going to handle
that if we're doing alternate plats. Just -- just to keep in
the back of everyone's brain. Doesn't affect this, really,
but it's a -- you know, how we're going to handle some of
these with O.S.S.F. requirements that we're now having to
look at.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you.
JUDGE TINLEY: 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. Let's move
to Item 5; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
approve Road and Bridge vehicle policy.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Enclosed is the revised
vehicle policy for Road and Bridge that we discussed several
weeks ago. For informational purposes, I've enclosed Court
Order Number 26067 approving the policy in October of 1999,
and the completed forms of the employees that were approved
under the order. Also enclosed is a policy done last year
2-25-08
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~, after the ice storm for both -- from both Eva Hyde and me
outlining the job requirements during an emergency. And if
an employee lives in an area that is cut off during extreme
weather, they will need to make arrangements to get out
before the roads are impassable. To help accommodate this
requirement, you've allowed us to purchase the FEMA mobile
home that was placed in the Ingram yard. At this time, I ask
that you approve the policy as presented, and ask if a signed
copy of the document needs to be filed anywhere other than
our office, which is for the vehicles.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom, a couple of minor language
changes in that very first paragraph. On the third line,
where it reads "these men," it should probably read "these
employees" or "these individuals."
MR. ODOM: These employees.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: And then towards the end of that
line, after the comma after "areas," insert the word "and"
while in the truck.
MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, say that one again?
JUDGE TINLEY: "And" before "while."
MR. ODOM: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Delete "he has" and substitute the
words "will have."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You ever thought about
2-25-08
1
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
becoming a lawyer?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's good stuff.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's infringing on my
wordsmith stuff.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, that's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I got all those same things
marked.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got some more?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I do.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'll let Bill run with the rest of
them.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, you may have some
more.
j JUDGE TINLEY: No, that's -- I'm going to leave it
I, to you now for the more -- the more finite wordsmithing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Item C, "they have
contact." I would suggest you change that to, "Each has
contact with each other, our office, and Animal Control."
Got it?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Item 2, second line. I
would delete the word "motoring" and just say, "for the
well-being of the public." And down on your third dot under
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Personal Use, "Commuting to and from work unless in an
assigned vehicle." And that's all I've got. I had the same
'~, ones the Judge had.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about this one?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one?
MR. ODOM: Do you wish to come back with another
agenda item, or --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which one?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm on the -- the, I guess,
internal policy for Road and Bridge emergency response.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was going to -- what are we
voting on? Is this what we're looking at, or both of them?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess we're revising,
right?
MR. ODOM: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's -- you may be
making a good point, Jon. I'm not sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: The vehicle policy, is my
understanding.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That would be rare.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That we just completed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, there were two of
2-25-08
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
them in there. We're only really looking at the first one.
Is that correct, Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: And the second one back behind -- behind
the form to fill out is the other policy that we implemented
for ice storms and all. There was a question about people
being cut off or living in areas of not -- we implemented
this a year ago.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're going to end up -- at
the end of the day, we're going to have one policy and not
two; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I would rather you put
this policy in this policy.
MR. ODOM: Into that one?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Incorporate them. Because this
one refers to a specific instance, to me, and it's confusing,
and this is a permanent policy.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or maybe a separate policy. I
think it ought to go into one.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We need to end up with
one --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One policy.
MR. ODOM: Okay. Let me work on it, and we'll put
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
it together.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And if you do that, the
line, "If you choose to be paid..." may want to take out that
name, and just put --
MR. ODOM: I'm sorry, what?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It refers to a prior Treasurer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You have the name of the
former Treasurer.
MR. ODOM: Do I?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would put "County
Treasurer" there, as opposed to a particular name.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that policy needs to be
generic, not --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: Could we generally accept what I have,
and then I come back with a new format? That's -- is that
'~, appropriate?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that may be more appropriate
than adopting two different policies, I would think.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You do not want to adopt
two different ones.
MR. ODOM: So, you want me to come back with just
one?
2-25-08
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
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm talking about blending the two
of them together.
MR. ODOM: Well, I was just saying my format is
basically -- this is what I'm trying to -- trying to
implement. I can understand putting it in one policy.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: County Attorney, you had a
comment?
MR. EMERSON: I do. I just want to emphasize to
the Court -- we discussed this some in the prior court
appearance, but if an employee is using a county vehicle for
personal use, it creates significant liability issues for the
County. And I know under Paragraph 3, it says should a
situation arise where it's imperative to use it for personal
use, and then it goes on to imply, "will be notified in
advance." Now, if some kind of emergency is coming up,
that's different than knowing you have to go to the doctor
and you're driving a county vehicle going to the doctor. I
just want to make sure the Court's aware of that again.
j COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that basically is -- is
almost looking at that whole issue we have about use of
personal vehicles by county employees for county business.
So, I mean, it's that whole vehicle issue that we've kind of
resolved, but kind of never resolved.
MR. ODOM: Can I work with H.R.? And I'll come up
with something that -- and she can give me guidance, come up
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
with something that's acceptable to the Court?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine with me. I mean, I
think we need it; it's an important policy that we get this
done, and I think we need to be real careful as to what we do
with it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, there are three
separate documents here, and I assume we're going to blend
all of them into one document; would that be correct?
MR. ODOM: Well, actually, there's two. This
vehicle policy, and then the policy we had for ice was
something that we did -- did over a year ago in January of
'07. You know, that was an internal thing that we did. And
then we came to y'all so we could have a place for them to
stay.
JUDGE TINLEY: The --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: The second one dealing with
emergency response --
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- and payroll and -- and that sort
of business, that's not limited to vehicles, is it?
MR. ODOM: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, it occurs to me we want
these things that are focused on vehicles in one policy, and
maybe things that aren't focused on vehicles --
2-25-08
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: We'll take internally.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- somewhere else, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I mean, and this
needs to go in job descriptions, is where that needs to go.
You need to get with Eva to get this into every employee's --
that is subject to it, in their job description, so that
there's not a question that they're being told to do
something different than their job description says.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you talking about the
emergency response document?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. I think I agree with the
Judge; I think that's probably really not a vehicle policy
issue, but it is a job description issue.
MS. HYDE: They added that to those specific
personnel's job description as an amendment or addendum,
because they were having some difficulty with -- with some
folks that couldn't get to work.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think the way that
document -- I mean, I don't know what your -- what the job
descriptions in your office look like, but this needs to be
revised, because it has wrong names in it and the dates are
kind of specific.
MS. HYDE: It was probably done right after I got
here, when we had the big ice storm.
', COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
2-25-08
1
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
MR. ODOM: I'll get with Eva and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Crystal clear, Leonard?
MR. ODOM: Oh, yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Clear as mud, right?
MR. ODOM: Clear as mud. We're working toward it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a 9:30 timed item,
which we're a bit past that now, so we'll take that up at
this time. Item 8, open bids for electrical, plumbing, HVAC,
and pest control. The first proposal that I have is from
Compton's of Kerrville, and it's electrical, plumbing, HVAC;
appears to be on all of those services. The next bid that I
have is from Terminix, dealing -- the local office here in
Kerrville -- with pest control. The next one I have is from
Hill Country Pest Control on pest control services. The next
one I have is from D.W. Electric, dealing with electrical,
plumbing, HVAC -- I wasn't aware that organization did
plumbing, but maybe they have that capability. None of those
services were excluded. The outside of the envelope says
"Proposal-electrical." So, is that it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept all bids and
refer them to Maintenance Director for review and
recommendation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Further question or discussion on that motion?
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
33
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 6; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for
the final revision of plat for Lots 5A and 5B in Grotto
Springs Ranch, Section I, and located in Precinct 3.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. This revision will combine
two 25-acre tracts, making one lot of 50 acres. It will be
done under the alternate plat process. At this time, we ask
the Court to consider revision of plat for Lots 5A and 5B of
Grotto Springs Ranch I, Volume 7, Page 287, Precinct 3.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on the
motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Question. This letter in
here from Mr. Voelkel to Truby, the question about being
approved without your signature, have y'all resolved that?
MR. ODOM: I think that that's been resolved on the
final.
2-25-08
1
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
MR. VOELKEL: Yes, sir.
MR. ODOM: You had O.S.S.F. --
MR. VOELKEL: They're on the plat, yes.
MR. ODOM: They're on the plat. But that's an
issue that I think that Mr. Letz is going to be talking
about. We had a direction one way, but let's don't beat the
horse to death. We'll wait. Did I answer your question?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Other questions or comments? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll move
to Item 7; consider, discuss, and accept Kerr County
Sheriff's Office 2007 Racial Profiling Report. Sheriff, do
you have any comments you'd like to make?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not unless there's any
questions.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for -- to
receive and accept the 2007 Racial Profiling Report.
Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The only comment I would
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
35
make, Judge, is this is a pretty good format, and perhaps we
with this and we can understand what they're doing. I
understand from talking to the Sheriff that this software is
available to each of the constables through what is available
on the J.P.'s computer system, and they can access this
software and do that, so maybe the Court can encourage the
constables to get consistent with the Sheriff's report.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments on
the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 9; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
appoint members to joint City/County committees to look at
issues related to library, health benefits, Road and Bridge,
EMS, broadband services, ETJ, dispatch, animal control, fire
services, and Reverse 911 services. I put this on the agenda
as the result of a joint City/County meeting that was held
here over a week ago, and the suggestion was made during that
meeting that -- that members be appointed to committees in
order to look at those various issues. So, ergo, the agenda
2-25-08
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I was bored over the
weekend, so I wrote out stuff.
JUDGE TINLEY: Beginning to sound dangerous, isn't
I he?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Uh-oh, he's been sitting at
his computer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sitting at my computer, and I
started thinking about this and the agenda. I've talked to
Mack; he and I worked quite a bit on this. Some of this got
us where we are, and I don't think it's going to be a
surprise to him, but maybe a little bit. I think we need to
move it a little bit further along on some of these things.
And, in a nutshell, I think we need to have -- we have been
talking about the airport, the library, and animal control
for probably the better part of 11 years, since I've been a
Commissioner, and I think it's time to put something -- to
put something on the table, and I'll just read it.
Proposal for Joint City/County Committee Related to
Library, Animal Control, and Airport. Committee to review
process to implement the following: City of Kerrville is to
become the sole entity for funding and operation of the
library. Kerr County to become responsible for operation and
funding of animal control throughout the county. City of
Kerrville and City of Ingram will need to repeal or modify
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
37
any ordinances related to animal control in favor of adopting
the county policy. And Kerr County to become the sole entity
responsible for funding and operation of the airport. Kerr
County will create an independent board to oversee and
operate the airport consistent with the vote of the citizens
of Kerr County in 1970. The committee will report back to
the Commissioners Court and City Council by May 12th and 13th
I respectively with an outline on implementation, with the goal
of implementing same by 2008-2009 budget. I see that as one
committee .
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you a question
right quick. If that were a motion, I would second it, by
the way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will be a motion you can
second pretty quick.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask my question
first, though.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When we're talking about --
when we're talking about committees, are we -- and us
assigning someone to that committee, are we talking about a
member of this body, or we talking about going down to
Schreiner Bank -- or used to be Schreiner Bank, and finding
someone there, to appoint someone from the community? What
kind of committee are we talking about?
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
38
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it depends on --
pretty much a Commissioners Court, City/County, whoever, you
know, to figure out if this is reasonable. They can each
work with their appropriate staffs a little bit and come back
with a report as to, "Yes, this can be done," or, "No, it
can't be done." The next committee, I think, is -- I'll just
read the proposal. The Joint City/County committee related
to Kerr County Road and Bridge Department and City of
Kerrville's Streets Department. Committee to review specific
could assist with street construction, street reconstruction,
and street maintenance within the City of Kerrville.
Committee will report back to Commissioners Court and City
Council by May 12 and 13 respectively with an outline of
implementation and a goal of implementing trial program by
2008-2009. So, to me, that is a committee that the two
gentlemen that are probably going to be on it are sitting
next to each other at the back. I know they're already
meeting on this issue; Charlie Hastings, or whoever the City
Manager appoints from the City standpoint, and from our
standpoint, Len Odom.
And on the next page, committees related to health
2-25-08
1
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
benefits, dispatch, Reverse 911, and broadband services.
Basically, the same thing. Committees report back May 12 and
13 respectively with outline of potential joint collaboration
and recommendation of any budget implications for 2008-2009.
And the last committees will be committees related to fire,
EMS, law enforcement, and committees will report back to
Commissioners Court by May 12 and 13 respectively with an
outline of 2008-2009 budget, of potential collaboration and
recommendation of a future timetable for further review.
nature. The one in between, the health benefits and
broadband services, dispatch, I think those are petty much
staff-driven, in my mind. That's just how I see them. I
mean, certainly, it's all open for discussion. I just wanted
to get it moving, and it just seemed to me that we are --
we've been talking about these so long that if we don't have
specific timetables and -- and, you know, direction, we're
just -- we'll be exactly where we are today a year from now.
And I -- I think we just need to move forward. If we're
going to try to start transferring some of these operations
back and forth, let's do it or not do it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think you're absolutely
2-25-08
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
reporting back to both the City Council and Commissioners
Court I think are good suggestions.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you know, I do think we
need to fill in some names, I guess, in here, as to who the
people are. And -- and if -- you know, if the Court is
somewhat in agreement with the direction, you know, we can
use this document; I think Jody has a copy of it, so it can
be put in or modified as y'all see appropriate.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: On your second-to-last
committee, where you put health benefits and dispatch in that
one --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not one committee;
that's a -- those are probably three different committees.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. I was thinking dispatch
ought to go with your last one, if you had that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put dispatch and Reverse 911
because those are kind of 911 functions, and I think -- I
think there's been a lot of work done on dispatch, and up to
now, it hasn't been -- you know, any appearance that it's
going to work real well right now, based on -- well, I think
Buster and I were on the committee last year that looked at
that along with Chief Young and you, Rusty. But the Reverse
911 part, which is related, I think that is very doable and
needs to be looked at.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And there's already, in that
2-25-08
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
one -- and I won't refer to it as "Reverse 911"; that's a
product name. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- that's a warning-type
system. I think you already have a representative in my
office and the police department and 911, and it wouldn't be
hard to add two more from Ingram and the fire department if
they want. That committee's -- you know, except for Ingram
Fire Department, has already met and seen some products, and
have already sent e-mails out since y'ap's joint meeting
last week or week before.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, and I got a copy of that
e-mail. The question is -- I didn't respond because it's not
myself -- for me to put myself on a committee or not put
myself on a committee. I think Commissioner Williams needs
to be on that committee.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Amerine's already
sketched out a scope of review which made pretty good sense
of what we had to look at with respect to this issue.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Did I stir it up enough? So --
MR. EMERSON: Just a brief comment. Your agenda
item doesn't allow you to appoint anybody to an airport
committee .
2-25-08
1
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doesn't allow us to what?
MR. EMERSON: Airport's not listed.
JUDGE TINLEY: Maybe you and I need to be on the
same page when I'm doing the agenda items.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can blame that on the
Judge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I didn't even really pay much
I attention.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is on mine, 'cause I
wrote it in. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Can we use Bill's agenda?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can -- we can delete, I
guess, the airport from that, or it can be -- depends on -- I
mean, I don't know how -- the best way to approach it. To
me, it's -- I want to get this moving forward on the table
with some timetables.
JUDGE TINLEY: Councilman Hamilton, your name has
been mentioned frequently. Do you have anything you want to
throw into the mix here?
MR. HAMILTON: No. I notice it's on tomorrow
night's City Council agenda, too.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I hope they didn't use my
agenda item and leave the airport out. (Laughter.)
MR. HAMILTON: No, I wrote a broader one.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
2-25-08
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I might add, Councilman,
MR. HAMILTON: A little early for humor for me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me throw something out here.
With -- with the airport thing being somewhat off the table,
possibly between now and coming back after our mid-morning
break -- we've got an addendum item where we're going to have
to take up an item at 11:30. As maybe reconsideration of
players here in the room; we've got our H.R. people, we've
got our Auditor, we've got the Sheriff, we've got the County
Attorney, we've got members of the Court. And I don't see
our I.T. guy here. We've got --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: He's at my office.
JUDGE TINLEY: We've got Leonard here. I think
maybe we can come up with the players to get this thing
rolling after -- after our mid-morning break. What's your
thought there?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That'd be fine. I mean, I just
think that -- you know, and, I mean, I didn't really realize
the airport wasn't included on the list. I just saw the list
and assumed it was all of our joint things, but the airport
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
44
is pretty much -- there are two Commissioners appointed to be
liaisons to that, and until a formal action can be taken,
we move on? Okay, let's move on to Item 10, then, if we
might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
you asked that this item be placed on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. This is a -- kind of a
are a couple of issues. One, I know of several instances
since we implemented our plan where the City of Kerrville
kind of handles platting in the ETJ where issues that have
come up because of -- of, I guess, if you look back to all of
the documents, there was nothing ever really addressing
street grade. Yet the County, you know, is not going to
accept a road that's over 12 percent, and that came up
recently and has caused the developer a fair amount of
heartburn, and rightfully so. So, there's that issue. And
the bottom line is, the County's the one that's getting stuck
with all these roads, and a lot of them are -- you know, are
going from the ETJ into the county, straddling that line, and
2-25-08
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
they still have to come to the County; we haven't helped
anything at all.
The part that I hadn't really thought about was
O.S.S.F. Anything in the ETJ that's using a septic system
still has to come through the County, so the developers are
still -- again, we haven't done anything to meet the
requirements -- or meet the goal of the legislation, which
was to -- kind of one-stop shopping. And it's created a
little bit of a problem, because the County's over the
Environmental Health Department, and the City's handling this
part, and there's no one entity that can really resolve some
of these, so they kind of get back and forth between the two,
and it's taken even a longer period of time. The final item
is that it appears to me -- and maybe I'm wrong on this, but
it appears to me that it's a whole lot easier for the County
to upgrade and modify our subdivision rules than for the City
because of their ordinance structure. The reason I'm
bringing this up is that in December, the County adopted
another whole set of subdivision rules and Regulations for
any lots 5 acres and less in size, and this -- and that's --
it's a very significant bunch of changes if you're under
small lots as to what can be done, the number of dwellings on
that lot, a lot of other requirements.
And even if we don't have to mess with the other --
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
46
rule, 'cause that's state law, 'cause we adopted that subject
to the Water Development Board, and we're basically
guaranteeing to the State that we are going to enforce those
stricter rules on these smaller lot sizes. So, you know, the
City is at the point of -- if we don't make that change here,
really, in my mind, the County should be the one over -- or
handling the ETJ. And if the City wants to have certain
areas where there's -- you know, I don't have a problem with
that. But it just seems to me it's a lot simpler and easier
I
~!i for the developers if we handle it, and I just -- and I was
the one that negotiated the deal with the City, and it didn't
work right. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, what in your mind
would be an example of an area where the City would make
decisions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Something that is adjoining the
city limits.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Like a subdivision.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Subdivision comes in that
adjoins the city limits, and -- and is an area that the --
you know, I know they don't have an annexation plan; we've
been told they don't have an annexation plan, but if they
were to have one, an area that would be, you know, in the
'~, next five years, annexed, something in that area. 'Cause, I
mean, there's areas like that. And I think there's one -- I
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
47
could be mistaken; maybe it's all in the city limits, but out
there up past Coronado, isn't that in the ETJ? It's -- Sandy
some legal requirements that we have to be real clear to the
public as to who handles what areas. But -- I think we need
to probably work through that, but I think we've probably
made it worse rather than better so far, so maybe we ought to
go the other direction and try to undo what we did, and
hopefully go from there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If my memory serves me, the
law allows that you can -- you could either go strictly
with -- the City and County could go strictly with the city
rules, or City and County could go strictly with the county
rules, or a blend of the two.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or we could divide -- I think
it's pretty -- as long as it's clear to the public that in
the ETJ, developers only have to deal with one entity.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree with that, and
definitely not paying fees at both places.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But, anyway -- so, the
purpose of the agenda item is not to really give notice of
canceling the agreement. The notice is that we need to go
2-25-08
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
back to the agreement and look at it. And in my mind, I
think that, you know, it needs to be a totally new direction,
but I think we just need to start that process going again.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what action are you
looking for today?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think a --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think you just did it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To give notice to the City.
I'll make a motion that we give notice to City of Kerrville
concerning our current agreement within the ETJ, that we
would like to modify same. And, I guess we should appoint
myself and -- Commissioner Baldwin? We did it last time and
did such a good job.
~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Will represent Commissioners
I~ Court with appropriate County staff to meet with the City to
resolve this issue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: That was a motion?
(Commissioner Letz nodded.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion and a second
as indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
49
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. Okay. That
brings us to Item 11; consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action on request from Hill Country Council on Alcohol and
Drug Abuse, Inc., to have the County Judge sign a memorandum
of understanding between Kerr County Court and Hill Country
Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse for funding with the
Department of State Health Services. Ms. Stevens? Thank you
for being here. I apologize for the somewhat late notice to
you, but I guess that's better than no notice at all.
MS. STEVENS: I'm just really honored that I've
been invited here to share with you this request from the
Department of State Health Services. We lost around $350,000
in 2004. We were in area schools in Bandera, Gillespie,
Kendall, Kerr, and Medina, providing a prevention program
called Botvin's Life Skills Training, and so it's got 20
years of scientific research on it. It's very, very helpful
to our students and our schools, and we're applying again
this year, and the MOU is just basically asking you to
support our efforts.
JUDGE TINLEY: The memorandum of understanding
and youth for support services, follow-up services, substance
abuse evaluations, outpatient treatment programs, educational
2-25-08
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
programs, and offender education programs. Is that occurring
at the present time?
MS. STEVENS: Yes, sir, for the past 16 years.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. And, in return, you
~, would agree to provide those services to the county courts;
I
is that correct? Which also --
MS. STEVENS: Which we're doing.
', JUDGE TINLEY: -- you've been doing for the past 16
years.
MS. STEVENS: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I'm -- have you seen a copy
of the MOU?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. EMERSON: And my only comment is just to make
sure that the Court understands, this is not an exclusive
II agreement.
MS. STEVENS: Right.
MR. EMERSON: 'Cause we use multiple services from
multiple agencies.
MS. STEVENS: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question is the adult
outpatient treatment program.
MS. STEVENS: Mm-hmm.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
51
JUDGE TINLEY: Where is that?
MS. STEVENS: At our facility. We've just built a
5,000-foot square building, and we have ample classrooms, and
we do outpatient three nights a week. We do individual
sessions with these folks, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's no -- it's not like
a detox unit?
MS. STEVENS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's beyond detox?
MS. STEVENS: Oh, it's -- the beauty of this one
is -- is that they can maintain their family situations and
their jobs and just come for treatment in the evenings, and
throughout the day.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No overnight?
MS. STEVENS: We don't do sleep-overs, no.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think once they closed the
substance abuse unit at Kerrville State Hospital, I'm not
aware of an inpatient facility that's publicly funded and
~~ operated.
MS. STEVENS: Inpatient, we just have Serenity
Foundation of Fredericksburg, La Hacienda, Starlite out at
Center Point. We're outpatient, and that is totally
different than inpatient.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. That's a total --
2-25-08
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that's a rotten shame, but that's life.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Following up the County
Attorney's suggestion, would it be appropriate to change
the -- on the first sentence, that we are entering -- second
-- yeah, second line of the first sentence, entering into a
"nonexclusive" agreement, as opposed to entering into this
II agreement?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
', COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that a motion, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second as
indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank you,
Ms. Stevens.
MS. STEVENS: Thank you very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate it. The remaining items
that we have on the regular agenda that are not timed items
', are -- are executive session items. That being the case, so
that the audience will know what's happening, we'll go ahead
and consider those two executive session items, and we will
2-25-08
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
resume at quarter to 11:00 in public and open session. So,
at this time, we will go out of public or open session to go
into open or closed session to consider items on the
executive session agenda.
(The open session was closed at 10:00 a.m., and an
executive session was held, the transcript of which
is contained in a separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: We are back in open or public
session at 10:15, and we'll be -- we will be in recess until
10:45.
(Recess taken from 10:15 a.m. to 10:47 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order from
our mid-morning recess. And, firstly, I will go to -- ask if
there's any member of the Court that has anything to offer
with respect to the matters or items considered in open or
executive -- closed or executive session.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I do, on Item 12.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What were you doing, Bill?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Go ahead. I'll do the
other one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Item 12. I want to move
that we -- the Commissioners Court authorize Human Resources
Department to post in-house for the open position of the
2-25-08
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
department head for the Court Compliance Department.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
Question or discussion on that 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. Any other
action offered with respect to items discussed in executive
or closed session?
'~, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, Judge. The Court
previously adopted a court order authorizing an improvement
in salary and grade for Nona Tucker, and I think there was an
error in the previous court order, and I would move that we
amend that court order to make the step and grade for
Ms. Tucker to be 17-10, as opposed to 17-9.
JUDGE TINLEY: I believe it called for a change in
job description also.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, it did, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: But otherwise to include that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Very well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
2-25-08
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of that motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I'd like to ask you
if we could return to -- before we move on, return to 1.9.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, that -- had you not
said that, I was going to ask if we're ready to go back
there. So, let's go back to Item 1.9, which we left open;
that is to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
appoint members to joint City/County -- joint County/City
committees to look at issues related to library, health
benefits, Road and Bridge, EMS, broadband services, ETJ,
dispatch, animal control, fire services, and Reverse 911.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess my whole point
would be to figure out -- help us figure out a way to
facilitate this issue, and using your words, Judge, kick the
can down the road a little bit. And one way to do that,
perhaps, would be if the Court adopted -- posted for adoption
a policy on these issues as defined in the document that
Commissioner Letz prepared and gave to the Court. Once we
establish -- post that for adoption and adopt the policy
2-25-08
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
along those lines, then we can -- then we have made the
statement that we're in favor the what the Commissioner is
saying, and that can be moved on down to City Council pretty
quickly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- so what we're doing
is -- well, I think I know what you're saying, but the -- we
can take action on the committees, but in addition to that,
we can post a special meeting for later this week to adopt a
policy on the first segment of this, which is where we're
saying related to the library and animal control, and then we
can add to that special posting the airport as a policy
issue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's what I'm trying to
get out on the table. But I would ask the question, would
it -- can we move these others, or can we just -- or should
we just include them all as a policy and try to schedule a
meeting -- post it so that it can be scheduled for action,
say, Wednesday afternoon or something of that nature?
JUDGE TINLEY: Couldn't do it by Wednesday
afternoon and get 72 hours, I don't think.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thursday afternoon, then.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thursday afternoon at the earliest.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thursday, okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think we could -- all
of them below the first segment, I think we can probably go
2-25-08
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
ahead and just deal with those today, if we can figure out
who the people are.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Then we'll limit the
-- well, the others -- don't the others need to be -- no, I
guess not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're more all --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The only policy one is the
one that deals with the library and -- the library and animal
control.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think what would probably
make sense there is, then, on the first one, is to do a
policy at our -- at a special meeting. But I think you would
change the dates that that policy would just be -- and then
you have to implement that policy; that would be by that May
12th date. Basically, we're saying, yes, we want to make
that change. We want to do the library, the airport, and the
-- which we can't talk about, and the Animal Control, and
then -- as to how to implement that, and that'll force City
Council to vote on that policy. And if that policy is there,
they can figure out whether the implementation is reasonable
or not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay with me. Do you see
any nods of the head -- negative nods of the head from --
JUDGE TINLEY: Not so far.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not so far. Then I
2-25-08
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
would -- I would move that -- this is probably one of two
motions that'll end up out of Agenda Item 1.9. I would move
that we post a special Commissioners Court meeting for
Thursday -- what's a good time for everybody? 1 o'clock?
2 o'clock? 3 o'clock? Judge, what's your schedule?
JUDGE TINLEY: We have juveniles starting at 1:30
typically, so if you could start it --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 11 o'clock?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've got a meeting at 11:00.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're going to be hard-pressed to
make an 11 o'clock posting.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 3:00?
JUDGE TINLEY: Possibly -- well, I don't know how
long juvies will be, but I can suspend the juvies and we
could do it at 3:00, as far as that goes. 3 p.m. Thursday?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Schedule a special
Commissioners Court meeting for 3 p.m. Thursday, the 28th of
February, 3 p.m., for the purpose of adopting a policy
related to library, animal control, and airport.
JUDGE TINLEY: And possible members of the Court
and/or staff to serve on that committee?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I had
that in mind, yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
59
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second as
indicated. Question or discussion on that 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. Now, step
two, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't have step two, but
', the guy immediately to your left probably does.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I'm going to give that to him,
then.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the rest of it's fill
in the names for the committees on the rest of the -- Road
and Bridge committee, which to me would be Len Odom. And,
Judge, I know you've been very involved with that. If you --
and I don't think we need to make it huge. That's who I see
coming from the county side, Len and the Judge. And probably
Rex would be ex-officio of all of these, just from the
standpoint there's going to be some legal issues along the
way. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He's always so glad to help.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You can tell it's track
season; look at that red nose.
JUDGE TINLEY: And then on the committees -- the
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
60
health benefits, to me it's Eva Hyde, who's I think already
met with the City; it's already ongoing. And, Judge, I think
you've been involved with that as well. And if anyone else
wants to jump in on these, these are just names that I
thought of. The -- it's not Reverse 911, but we know what
we're talking about.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Warning system.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The warning system. I think
Commissioner Williams is kind of the lead on that, and
then -- I don't know who else needs to be on that. I mean,
it's kind of already working, it looked like, Rusty.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, that was one vendor.
They wanted to look at other ones, but what I would suggest
is either me or my designee. I just want to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It would be Sheriff or your
designee. Chief of Police has already indicated he has a
designee.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But we don't deal with those
people.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we need Mr. Amerine
involved.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. Mr. Amerine, me or my
designee, and probably the Ingram Marshal or his designee,
'cause it will have some effect with them. And then the
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
61
chief -- Police Chief and fire department, EMS, and their
designees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about the Commissioner
from the head of the river?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: From the head of the river?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, from up -- upper part
of the river. 'Cause they're -- floods is the big deal. I
mean, y'all can call this stuff anything you want to call it,
but floods --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Floods are a big deal with the
county, and all we're doing is looking at vendors that would
do both. I don't -- it doesn't bother me if two
Commissioners are on it. I just don't --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, that's fine.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- don't want too much.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Essentially --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And it wouldn't be a bad idea
to have one person that could represent all the volunteer
fire departments.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree with that.
I VFD and Commissioners.
'~, COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would say that should be
Ray Lynch, probably.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have no problem with that.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
62
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that, yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ray Lynch.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ray Lynch, Ingram.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm, and Commissioner 4.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Because once you start
putting this thing into place, you're going to need his
assistance getting it done out there, I can tell you that
right now.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, it's -- you really
don't. It's really simple, and the main two players that are
going to be having to pay for it is going to be the City and
the County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Basically, that's correct.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's, you know, what we went
through before, so that's your --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What this committee's going
to tackle has already been speed out in terms of review by
Mr. Amerine.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So it shouldn't be that
difficult. My question is, this was styled to do -- to do
both dispatch --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
63
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I assume that means joint
dispatch?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think joint dispatch needs to
get moved to that fire, EMS, law enforcement group.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Unless y'all are after
something different, that's already been discussed and gone
through, and I think that's been answered, unless y'all are
wanting to reopen that and bring it back up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I want to reopen it and
bring it back up.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it goes back to this
second fire, EMS, law enforcement, and I think the -- I think
it kind of goes in with that. And the idea there is to -- is
there any benefit to doing anything different than we're
doing right now? That's kind of how --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. As far as law
enforcement issues, I mean, to me, joint dispatch and warning
system are the two issues we have. I don't know how much
else you --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Some on City Council think
there should be -- maybe the Kerrville Police Department
should be greatly reduced and the Sheriff's Department
increased.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thanks.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
64
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that's what I'm saying;
they're talking big, thinking out of the box, big picture.
There are --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They want to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- two Councilman that are
broad thinkers at the moment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's go back to that joint
City/County meeting and what Mr. Hamilton was speaking about.
Bringing this information back to the two governing bodies so
everybody knows what's good, bad, and indifferent. I tried
to make the point that day about -- about joint dispatch;
that while we may be familiar -- and I am, and I know you
are -- with what took place in the meetings that the Sheriff
was involved in, and I assume that the Chief of Police or
whomever he designated is, I don't know that the entire Court
knows all the ins and outs. And I bet you the City Council
does not know all the ins and outs or the reasons why it hit
a wall. I think we ought to -- that ought to be public, in
the public as to why it hit the wall.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the other thing is, on
this topic, is there -- is it worth pursuing any kind of
additional look at how law enforcement's done in the county
and the city? I mean, fire and EMS, is there any reason to
look at -- you know, are we doing -- are we pretty happy
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
65
where we are, or should we look at doing something different?
And I'm pretty happy, personally, but, you know, others may
not be.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's fine. Whatever y'all
suggest.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't see fire and EMS is
any change at all. I mean, I don't believe -- I don't
believe the City will -- will hit home very well with us
funding half of the police -- or the fire stations and the
staffs inside the city limits of Kerrville. Those kinds of
things to start somehow reappropriating or redividing the
amount of tax money that's brought in.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, it doesn't make sense.
It's a level of service. When you get to those topics, to
me, it's a whole different level of service, and it's -- that
means it's a whole different funding.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's -- you know --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, the old argument
about the double taxation issue in the city -- which I'm
tired of hearing about, but I guess as soon as these folks
get tired of talking about it, there will be somebody new
come in and start it over. Number one, they really need to
go talk to Representative Hilderbran about that issue. But,
number two, speaking about unfair, you know, you have the --
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
66
the EMS contract is an example. You have people out in the
county that are paying for that that will never use it, not
come anywhere near ever using it. So, to me, if you really
want to start talking fair and being fair to one another,
then you have to -- as far as the EMS is concerned, I think
you have to go to the user -- user fee. If you don't use it,
you don't pay it. If you use it, you pay, and you pay big
probably. But -- so, you know, why don't we -- we
continually talk about this double taxation thing, and yes,
it's a reality, and I understand that. But it's not a damn
thing we can do about it, so to be asked that we pay three
times as much as the city because -- taxpayers out in the
county pay three times as much as the city taxpayers, is
unfair. But to fix some of that, I think, is the -- is the
user fee with the EMS program. That just -- am I putting you
to sleep, or are you trying to figure out what I'm saying?
JUDGE TINLEY: Both.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Well, that's where
I'm at on the thing. I just don't want to hear -- I'd rather
not hear about all that nonsense any more. It is nonsense,
and there's nothing -- if there was something that we could
do about it, hell, let's get it out there on the table and
talk about it and do something about it. But there's nothing
we can do about it. We don't set up the taxing structure in
counties.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
67
JUDGE TINLEY: The short answer is, Commissioner,
that we don't have the authority to exempt anybody from --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- from the operation of the ad
valorem taxes that are specified by state law. Your -- your
observation about the fair way to do this -- for example,
emergency services; create one emergency services district
that has the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- authority to administer and to
fund, and make it concurrent with the county boundaries,
and -- and then let it happen.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the answer.
JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect the distribution of those
services would be somewhat different than they are presently
if -- if that were done. With the ESD being county-wide, or
near county-wide, having the authority to -- to specify where
those services should be based from, as opposed to where
they're currently based from, there may be some difference
there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all I know about
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, then, going back up here,
health benefits will be Judge and Ms. Hyde. Broadband
services is, I presume, John Trolinger. I'm not sure what
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
68
broadband services is; I put him down for that. Reverse 911,
whatever that thing's called, is all those people we named.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's name those again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill Williams, Rusty, Amerine,
Ingram Marshal, Ray Lynch, and Bruce Oehler, and whoever the
City wants.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That's a big one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then the roads is Len Odom
and the Judge. And then on the -- that first block, we'll
handle that as a new posting for a slightly different action
item. And that -- and out of that posting will also be
whoever's responsible to help facilitate that happening by
this year's budget.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And style it accordingly.
Adopt a policy and make an assignment so we don't get locked
out of doing that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Law enforcement, who are you
going to put on that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the law enforcement, fire
EMS, Commissioner Baldwin --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I figured that you need
somebody big on there to referee between you and the Police
Chief.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- and Rusty, from our
standpoint.
2-25-08
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
JUDGE TINLEY: First Responder rep.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need a First
Responder rep, and we need a volunteer fire department on
there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Isn't First Responder --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you something.
Did you say volunteer fire department or First Responder?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Both.
JUDGE TINLEY: Both.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, one of each. Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But wouldn't First Responder be
the City?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think you're looking at --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not necessarily.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. So, we need to come
up with those individuals that want to serve on that. Ray --
to my mind, Ray can do that one too, but he may not want to.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, as long as they have
evening meetings. Ray's working for City of Ingram now.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, on the last one,
Commissioner, Commissioner Baldwin is going to take fire,
EMS, law enforcement, and joint dispatch.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
2-25-08
~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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Way to go, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll help with you that if you
want me to help you with that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's going to be pretty much
open and closed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's going to be pretty
short. I think they're kind of a --
JUDGE TINLEY: Are you wanting Commissioner Letz
there?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Additional muscle?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I got Rusty.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's the guy with the
left-handed gun.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think if -- I'll make a
motion that we approve the assignments as mentioned.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Further question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the -- part of that
will be to fill in the names and get this along with the
posting from -- of the other motion to the City Council
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
71
members today.
MS. GRINSTEAD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So they can have it for
tomorrow. I think they'll understand the gist of where we
are.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So they know what we're
~ doing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Piece of cake, right, Ms. Grinstead?
MS. HYDE: And you want us to bring back stuff by
the 12th of May?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: (Nodded.) And the reason I
chose that date is, if we're going to do it this year, we
pretty much have to start -- we have to know by then. And if
it's not -- you know, it may come back and they say, "Yes, we
can do something, but it ain't going to happen this year; we
need more time." But if we're going to do it -- anything
this year, it's got to be -- pretty much, that's the
deadline.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is ample time to get it
done, too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Should be able to.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or comments on the
motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
2-25-08
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
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Okay, gentlemen, I
think that pretty well takes care of the agenda, with the
exception of our 11:30 timed item. Why don't we go to
Section 4 of the agenda, payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to pay the
bills. Question or discussion on the motion? All in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we have
any budget amendments?
MS. HARGIS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any late bills?
MS. HARGIS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly
reports from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3; Justice of the
Peace, Precinct l; District Clerk; Justice of the Peace,
Precinct 2; Constable, Precinct 2; and Justice of the Peace,
Precinct 4. Do I hear a motion that those reports be
approved as presented?
2-25-08
1
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve
those reports as designated and presented. 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 carried. We'll move to
Section 5, reports from Commissioners, liaison/committee
assignments. Commissioner Baldwin, do you got anything for
us?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. I've been hanging
out with the Historical Commission, and kind of an
interesting -- interesting bunch. It's the first time I've
ever been invited. I've been a liaison for 75, 80 years, and
first time I've ever been invited, and I enjoyed it very
much. And they -- the new regime over there seems to have
some really fun and exciting things on their minds, and
they're going to start -- we'll start hearing about them.
And we've -- actually, we've already heard about some of it,
but there's some exiting stuff going on, and just wanted to
let you know that I'm hanging out with these guys. They're
fun.
2-25-08
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is there a time limit on the
amount of time that you meet with those guys? Do you have a
set time to meet, and it's going to be over --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Me?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- an hour later, or is it
going to be three or four hours later from the time the
meeting starts?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you talking about me
particularly? I walk in and sit down; when I get tired, I
get up and leave. Simple as that. Just like I do this one.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
the Court -- you initiated it be circulated -- from the
Community Council of South Texas, and it made it through
Commissioner Baldwin and his comments. It has got lodged in
my box, and I think it's appropriate that I tell the Court
exactly what's going on with that so we don't get ourselves
all bollixed up. AACOG authorized a special investigation of
Community Council of South Texas, and the former Executive
Director of longstanding, Mr. Notzon, was the one chosen to
do this. He presented his draft report to the management
committee, which met at 7:30 this past Tuesday morning, just
prior to the two-day retreat of AACOG for long-term planning,
and it's really a very disturbing overview of community
2-25-08
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
services. I won't bore with you all the details, but I'll
committee met on Friday, February 8th, issued a finding on
the controller that he had knowingly provided a financial
report to the board in January without having a 111,000
past-due bill recorded. That's for openers. The food
program, cost of consumables are exceeding the budget. The
cost for a meal is exceeding the reimbursement rate. There
was a past year deficit of a hundred -- almost $155,000,
based on this financial report. In addition to that, there
are no savings that are going on with respect to that
program. Instead of trying to operate the food program out
of one kitchen, they're operating out of five separate
kitchens, five separate staffs, five separate purchasing
agreements, and there are -- there's no synergy, no ability
to curb or control cost.
Another thing, the Community Services Block Grant
that we're -- that we're being asked to consider and so
forth, there was a -- that particular program is in severe
trouble. It's a reimbursement program. The problem is, on a
cost reimbursable basis, the current fiscal needs of the
agency will not allow them to expend any money which they do
not have, and they have a carry-over of about 114,000, and
there's also some deficit problems with that. Community
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
76
Health Services Program, that program has $155,000 in prior
year debt, and 22,000 in current debt. All of which is to
say that -- there's more things in this report. All of which
is to say that this report, when it's finalized, will come
back day after tomorrow to AACOG, and the issue is whether or
not AACOG -- they've been petitioned to take over this
program, and the sense of the management committee is that we
might consider taking over the program for the future, but
we're not going to pick up their baggage, okay? But I just
bring this to the Court so that we know what we're getting
into if we get into bed with this group as it is currently
boarded and operated. End of report.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, I think when this
thing first came to light -- oh, about -- I think in December
actually is when -- when things came in contact with the fan
blades, as they say -- there was almost $80,000 in credit
card debt.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: That had been accumulated, among
other things. And they were on a -- for -- on their
programs, they were on a reimbursement basis. They could
only get reimbursed by Department of State Health Services
after they expended the funds and provided evidence of
expenditure. They're in a pretty deep hole to climb out of
right now.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
77
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They really are.
JUDGE TINLEY: And I had a discussion with
Mr. Notzon, and he was pretty astounded by some of his
discussions with the financial people and their rather
cavalier attitude about not disclosing some of the
significant debt to the board when they were having their
meetings. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there are other issues.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sale of vehicles to an
employee after they were sent to the buddy's garage for
repair.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, that's -- I think it
was a Mr. Ramirez was the --
JUDGE TINLEY: Ramirez.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- was the Executive
Director of this thing for 20 years -- more than 20 years.
He was removed within the last year or so.
JUDGE TINLEY: He resigned under pressure at that
meeting in December --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that Judge Danny Sheel from Comal
County asked me to attend. That was really my first notice
of that -- of that organization. Had come to find out that
outfit had provided, I think, some Planned Parenting services
2-25-08
~s
1
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 Kerr County two or three years prior to that time, but
they hadn't provided any services of any kind to Kerr County
for a period of several years. And Judge Scheel was of the
impression that -- and the basis for his requesting me to
attend was, lacking a specific appointment by this Court of a
Kerr County representative, that by default, that whoever sat
as County Judge of this county was on the board.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: And he asked me to attend in that
respect. And -- and I was advised by the staff of the
Community Council of South Central Texas that, no, Kerr
County was represented by another board member, and that I
was welcome to observe, but could not otherwise participate.
That was the meeting at which Ramirez resigned under
pressure, and there was a call for impropriety.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Anyhow, they were $300,000
in debt, and we need to be very careful.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So my thoughts that I wrote
down about us not having the representation that Comal County
does is just kind of a silly little thing, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd say let's forget it for
i now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
~, JUDGE TINLEY: Don't even want to know who they
are, much less what they are.
2-25-08
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: I don't want to join them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Me either.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have anything, Commissioner
Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. I'll probably put it on
our next agenda or the one after that. Nothing critical, but
I think we need to get to it, is follow-up of the street
annexation issue or area annexation issue that we would like
to give to City of Kerrville. I have a few small areas in my
precinct that I think the City should, you know, look at
annexation, and I -- and I think each of us have to look at
our precincts and see what areas -- I would suspect that
Commissioners for Precincts 1 and 2 both have some areas, and
probably south of the river, that may fall in that category.
I don't know if Commissioner Oehler does out west or not.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Maybe one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, anyway, not a huge -- I
don't want to just try to dump a lot of stuff on the City,
but a few areas that I -- that I really think should be in
the city limits. So, I'll probably put that on our next
agenda so we can all be thinking about that. And then at the
-- at our next meeting, I'll put it on the agenda for a
workshop related to the O.S.S.F. and platting issues, and Rex
hopefully can attend that as well, because it's -- it's
getting more defined by the Attorney General every day, it
2-25-08
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
seems, as to what has to go through that office, and then how
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, you probably saw the
article in the paper about Animal Control chasing Mouflon
sheep in the parking lot across the river. There was -- I
think those were the last two that there were to catch.
Janie and her department did it, rather than hire somebody to
do the trapping of these animals that were just turned out by
somebody who left town. There -- I think there was about 24
head of them. And Mouflon sheep, some of them might be real
pure-blood, but they're still pretty wild. And they managed
to set up a trap south of town, and they caught all but --
they finally got those two. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's not an easy job.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's not an easy job.
They're hard to catch. And they did -- they took care of
that. And the news media drove up taking those pictures that
you saw of those sheep right at the very moment when they
didn't need anybody there, and they didn't get one. They did
get one, but the other one got away; they had to get it
later. But news media drove up taking pictures and spooked
them, so that was just before they took off, the picture in
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
81
I also got a complaint from one of the county
elected officials that had a meeting at the Ag Barn, that
they had some cars broken into. It's really poor lighting
out in front of that thing, and we need to get some lighting
and stuff done as well. I've got Tim kind of looking into
that a little bit. It's not too bad in areas, but up
especially in front, it's probably the worst it is anywhere
in the parking lot. And we -- we have some poles and things
along the east side that we could put some different type
lights on, I believe, and do a better job of lighting up that
area. Part of what -- you know, we talk about some of that
in this workshop session about the Ag Barn, but that -- that
one and Environmental Health has been issuing some citations
and things, and people that haven't been complying, they've
been sending out some letters and trying to get them to do
the final thing to get their -- as usual, their permit to
operate. I guess that's about all.
I don't -- you know, Janie and them are doing a
good job out there. They've had a little controversy with a
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
82
mad volunteer who's kind of dabbling into areas that they're
not supposed to be dabbling into, and hopefully that won't --
won't come to light. But they will do what they're supposed
to do, and not get involved in policy and politics and
everything else. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I noted with some interest a
copy of an article, apparently out of Corpus Christi
Caller-Times, from the County Attorney dealing with
generalities in postings. It occurred to me that the
discussion that we just had, as opposed to -- we're talking
about liaison assignments, which, of course, are specified as
a matter of public record, and whether or not that may not be
specific enough. Because, knowing that Buster deals with
certain areas, Commissioner Williams with others, and so
forth, I don't think we've got a definitive answer to that
question, and it may take a while to sort it out. I'm not
sure what the custom and practice is across the state. On
information items, as opposed to action items, certainly, I
can see with regard to action items that you want to have
specificity when it comes to dealing with the public's
business, so they have a real good handle, by looking at the
agenda, as to what it is you're going to do or not do or
think about doing.
2-25-08
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: When it comes to talking about items
of general discussion, I'm --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Information.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- sometimes I wonder if the tail's
not starting to wag the dog.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, on that, it seems to me
that -- I mean, because we try to limit our discussion to
liaison positions and just give a report, I think that we're
in compliance, to me. But, you know --
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's my thinking, that since
it refers to the liaison or committee assignments, that in
and of itself focuses on what the discussion is going to be
about. And if we've got to be more specific than that, it's
almost as though we're going to have to do specific agenda
items on every one of them.
MR. EMERSON: Just -- I passed that article along
because I thought it was of great interest to the Court. I
have a couple inquiries out to find out how much more
specific we need to be, if at all, and I've not received a
response back yet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. EMERSON: But in the interest of being
conservative, I thought it was better to disseminate the
information.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
84
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm -- I'm not aware of any concerns
or complaints that have been made by the -- by the public or
the media or anybody else about lack of proper notice when it
comes to any of the items that we have posted. Occasionally
there's a question, and sometimes, you know, the wording's
not as clear as it needs to be, and certainly we -- there are
times, just like today, where the agenda item was not styled
correctly and we have to bring it back and do an additional
consideration. But, certainly, if there's anyone that's
confused or doesn't feel like it's adequate, you know, we'd
be glad to hear about it. I'm -- that's why we're here, is
to serve these folks.
MR. EMERSON: I'm not aware of any complaints
either, but if the Attorney General is choosing to tighten
their interpretation, which is kind of what the article
implies, I would prefer to be on the front side instead of
the back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd be curious to know what
Jim --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Allison.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- Allison thinks about it.
Do you ever communicate with his office?
(Mr. Emerson shook his head negatively.)
2-25-08
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Have you ever wanted to?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Have you ever tried to?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can put you right in
there. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And you expect to get an
answer from him?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I never have gotten
an answer from the guy, but he's the state lawyer. I mean --
I mean for commissioners courts.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I think County Attorney has
another local government-recognized expert on the payroll, so
to speak, that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- he has quick assess to, just by
picking up the phone and bouncing some things off of, and
that's always good to have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, he has an employee
down there that's kind of like that.
JUDGE TINLEY: I see.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think she's pretty sharp.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Looks like we're at 11:30
now, so we'll take up the 11:30 agenda item, and that is to
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action regarding an
order to authorize the issuance of tax notes. This is in
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
86
connection --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Huh, look at that.
MR. HENDERSON: It's 11:30.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Imagine him just appearing
at 11:30. Look at that.
JUDGE TINLEY: You obviously -- you've got a smile
on your face; you didn't hear the discussion immediately
preceding your walk through the door.
MR. HENDERSON: It says -- with all due respect,
~i Commissioner Baldwin -- I assume it was you -- the clock says
i
11:28. I was told to be here at 11:30.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did I say anything bad about
this guy?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not yet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Not yet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not yet.
MR. HENDERSON: Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: My reading of that clock from here,
Mr. Henderson, it says 11:30.
MR. HENDERSON: I defer to you, Your Honor.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, that's where we are.
MR. HENDERSON: I appreciate the opportunity to be
present before the Court. For the record, my name is Robert
Henderson. I'm the managing director with RBC Capital
2-25-08
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
Markets, and we have the honor and privilege of being the
County's financial adviser. As I was directed by the
Commissioners Court the last time I personally presented
here, I have been working under the direction of Ms. Hargis
on preparing a tax note in the amount of $1,780,000. A
detailed budget was prepared. I don't know if you got copies
of it, so I'm going to hand them out here. That shows
exactly where the one million --
JUDGE TINLEY: Just give them to me; I'll pass them
around.
MR. HENDERSON: -- exactly where the $1,780,000 is
going. The second page is a spreadsheet, and I should hand
one to the Sheriff, 'cause he's going to be interested in
I this .
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I see.
MR. HENDERSON: Sorry.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I like to see something.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jody, two copies.
MR. HENDERSON: It's a spreadsheet that does a
couple of things. Number one, starting with Column B, it
shows the out -- currently outstanding debt of the County,
and Column C shows the tax rate associated with that
currently outstanding --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bob, can you hold off? We're
two copies short.
2-25-08
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
MR. HENDERSON: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's all right, we're making
two more copies.
MR. HENDERSON: I don't know how we did that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Paper supplies running low at
your office?
MR. HENDERSON: I didn't have my vitamin B-12 this
~ morning.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the -- one thing while
we're waiting. Rex had a question about some of the items
being included. Has that all been resolved?
MR. EMERSON: I talked to Jeannie. And, for your
information, the question that was raised was, in a number of
articles that I reviewed preparing for another issue, it
appears that there's some limitations on reimbursement bonds
and operating expenses that's associated with it and
incorporation of operating expenses into those reimbursement
bonds. I talked to Jeannie about it, and Jeannie said that
she's been in communication with -- with Mr. Henderson and
his office, and she's comfortable with the expenses as
they're worded. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. EMERSON: I'm not a bond attorney. I just -- I
raised the issue, and they're comfortable with it. So --
MR. HENDERSON: And that is an important question.
2-25-08
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
And, in fact, when Ms. Hargis e-mailed this list of items, I
did forward it to the bond attorney, Tom Spurgeon, and asked
him to pay particular attention to those items and confirm
that they did meet the state law definition of capital
outlay. You know, things such as repair of windows and
doors, admittedly, that can be a gray area. Is that a normal
operating expense? Or is it, in fact, a capital outlay? And
according to the bond attorney, it is a capital outlay, an
eligible one for financing. So, we do have a written e-mail
from Mr. Spurgeon confirming his legal opinion that all these
are eligible items. Now, I also point out that, as the
customary -- and, in fact, required by the state
Constitution, everything has to be approved by the Texas
Attorney General's office. That's part of the reason why we
ask for a detailed list. So, as part of the approval process
of the transaction, Attorney General's office will also
review this list and confirm that everything is eligible for
financing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On the -- on those two repair
items -- I mean, "repair" is probably not a good word on
those, in my mind. I don't know if -- I mean, it's not
really repairing windows; it's replacing windows or upgrading
windows or refurbishing windows.
JUDGE TINLEY: Totally rehabilitating or replacing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rehabilitating. I mean, repair
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
90
comes into more a gray area, but what we're doing certainly
MR. HENDERSON: And I think what it really boils
down to -- and Mr. Spurgeon asked about, you know, the repair
of the windows versus replacement. I think what it boils
down to is, under GASB rules, can it be categorized as a
capital outlay? And if the answer is yes, then it's
financeable under the state law. And, again, the Attorney
General's office will review this as part of their process.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you like "repair," or
would you rather see "refurbishment" or "replacement" or --
MR. HENDERSON: I think when Mr. Spurgeon submits a
document to the Attorney General's office, he will make that
clarification based on the conversations he's had with
Jeannie and I.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. HENDERSON: So I just didn't -- didn't clarify
it on my sheet, but I think that Tom has. Going back to Item
2, then -- or Page 2, Column B shows the outstanding debt of
the district -- or the County. Column D shows the proposed
structure of the $1,780,000. And then skip over to Column I,
which shows the net taxable assessed valuation in the county,
2-25-08
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
and the footnote that we are anticipating about a 2 and a
half percent annual growth. And then Column J shows the
Sheriff will be interested in this -- is, as always, we don't
want to undertake any financing today that would limit the
latitude of the County to deal with its future capital
improvement needs. So, in visiting with Ms. Hargis, I asked
kind of the standard question, "What else is on the horizon
that	we need to	be cognizant of and potentially	planning
for?"	So that	we don't do something with this	tax note that
would limit the County's latitude, which is a fancy way of
saying doesn't cause an undue tax rate increase later because
we didn't plan for it. And the answer was, a potential for a
jail expansion, and something in the neighborhood of
$7 million, and the anticipated time for that would be 2010.
So, what I did was add Column F in there, just for
planning purposes, so that I can structure the $1,780,000 in
such a way that we could, in fact, effect that jail expansion
in 2010 without a rate increase. You can see, looking at
Column J, that the current tax rate for INS is 4.38 percent.
Because our interest rates came in very, very favorable, more
favorable than I anticipated, it is going to drop a little
bit to 4.31 -- 4.37. But you can see that we could take on
the $7 million worth of debt in 2010 for a jail expansion and
still have our tax rate be in the 4.35 to 4.37 percent.
2-25-08
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would that also -- would we
also have latitude to -- if necessary, to include
supplemental funding for a wastewater project if we don't get
what we need out of the Texas Water Development Board?
MR. HENDERSON: Yes, sir. Again, your current INS
tax rate is 4.4 cents, so 4.38 cents, we're showing a slight
decrease. We've got some opportunity with respect to the
outstanding debt in the county, which pays out in 2012. The
Judge and I, as well as Ms. Hargis, had an interesting
conversation about that. The interest rate on that debt is
about 4.2 percent. The interest rates available today -- in
fact, the interest rates on this tax note transaction is
3.3 percent. It would actually be slightly lower than that,
except if you look at Column D, you see that in order to
accommodate the jail financing, we pushed a fair amount of
that principal out to -- to 2013 in order to plan for our
future capital improvements. If we had done a level debt
structure, it would actually be less than 3.3 percent. So,
you would look at your existing debt of the county and say,
"Well, gosh, if we're at 4.2 percent, and current market's
3.3 percent, can we refinance and save some money?" Well,
the answer is yes and no. Ostensibly, we could get lower
interest rates there on the County's old debt outstanding at
4.2 percent. However, because it pays off so quickly, just
in 2012, that the expenses involved in doing the transaction
2-25-08
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
would end up eating the little bit of savings that you got if
we try to refinance between -- you know, from 4.2 down to
3.3.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Big interest year's already
i over.
MR. HENDERSON: Exactly. Now, the lawyer would
make some money; I'd make some money, but the County really
-- taxpayers wouldn't benefit. Mr. Baldwin gives me a hard
time as it is. I certainly can't go down that road.
JUDGE TINLEY: If we had 15 years left on that
issue, why, it might be --
MR. HENDERSON: It would be a very different story.
But we don't, so it's just really not cost-effective. But
the reason that I mention it is because those bonds are
currently callable, which means that any time the County
wanted to, we could go out and refinance them. Now, on a
stand-alone basis, it probably wouldn't make any sense.
However, when we look at the jail deal in 2010, or if there's
supplemental funding that might be required as a result of
the projects that the Water Development Board -- when we do
those, if we need to move some maturities around, it would be
cost-effective to take one or two of those jail --
outstanding jail bonds, go ahead and refinance them, 'cause
the incremental cost of doing that on top of the financing
that you'd already be doing would make it cost-effective.
2-25-08
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
94
', It's just not cost-effective on a stand-alone basis. That's
a long-winded way of saying yes, is the answer to your
question. And, in addition to the growth in the tax base
that we'd have to facilitate that, we do have some latitude
I in your existing debt that we can restructure on a
cost-effective manner. So, there are multiple ways to get
where you may need to go, depending on how that supplemental
funding works out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If -- if I'm reading this
right, if we do not do the jail expansion in 2011, there'll
be $350,000 available that year and the next two years to go
towards paying off this $1.78 million one faster?
MR. HENDERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So it could -- I mean, so,
depending on how that goes, it would pay off basically a year
earlier.
MR. HENDERSON: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or a little more, something
like that.
MR. HENDERSON: We certainly could. Now,
technically, we wouldn't pay this debt off, 'cause that's a
3.3 percent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. HENDERSON: But we could take that money and
2-25-08
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
pay off the other jail. We'd get to where you want to go,
reducing debt quicker.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. HENDERSON: Yes, sir. The last page in the
semiannual debt service schedule. Basically, what it
reflects is the principal and the interest at 3.3 percent and
what your total annual payments are. I know I talk fast.
I'll be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'd like to interject one
thing I mentioned to the Judge this morning, because it may
or may not -- and Jeannie knows this. Last Thursday, when we
were at the communications meeting with AACOG, we were
informed that, you know, by 2012, F.C.C. is going to cancel
all wideband radio frequencies, which is what this county is,
and everybody will be required to be narrow band digital.
That upgrade -- now, our current system can handle it, except
it is an upgrade into that system to convert it. But the
radio system itself is probably going to be close to half a
million. The car radio issue itself, with the radios that
are in the cars, we're currently paying 500 a year for each
radio that we add to a patrol car, and your costs will be
from a minimum of 2,500 to 5,000 per radio in the car.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: God.
2-25-08
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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And this is not going to be a
choice deal. They're canceling them.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think the feds are selling the
broadband licenses and making big money off of them.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So it will be a major expense
by 2012 at the latest.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This has to be by 2012?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We're told that they are
canceling them in 2012. That's what we were told last week.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There went your jail.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, if it operates like most
things in the federal system, why, the pressure will build
and they'll kick that out forward three to five years.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The problem you're going to
have, if other agencies, such as Kerrville P.D. -- D.P.S.
already has. When they go to it, the agencies that aren't
with it lose total communication with those other agencies.
So, if Kerrville P.D., the City goes to it, we aren't -- we
lose communication with the city of Kerrville in cars, okay?
D.P.S. has gone to it. We lost communication with D.P.S.,
except since they closed down their dispatch, they also still
have a broadband in theirs that they use to communicate with
us, but we have no communication and being able to hear
D.P.S. officers talk to each other. So, there will be some
major changes in communications.
2-25-08
97
1
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: I think it would be -- in your
-- one of your committee assignments that you got a little
bit earlier, coordinating with the City would be helpful with
that, at least time-wise, so we know when they're doing it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: City's already starting.
MS. HARGIS: They already started.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're buying radios that are
digital capable. They aren't digital, but they are --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- are preparing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay? We have not purchased
those type of radios.
MS. HARGIS: They started two years ago, the City
did, phasing in the new radios.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Were we aware of this when
we approved your new communication system?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, no. That was part of that
Project 25, and they had scrapped it back then and said it
was -- they weren't putting any time, and most of them were
still going to stay VHF, and the only thing we did do is, I
asked them to make sure we were digital capable of upgrading,
not replacing the entire system, if it ever did. You'll
remember, we had the bids from Motorola that --
2-25-08
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we're off target.
MR. EMERSON: Thank you.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- were, like, three times as
I much .
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's talk about our $1.78 million
tax note here.
MR. HENDERSON: Mr. Spurgeon, I believe,
Federal-Expressed to your attention, Your Honor -- to
Jeannie's attention, all the requisite documents that were
required. Posted the agenda language last week. Then there
was a motion by the Commissioners Court based on the agenda
language. I think, unless there's further questions, we're
probably ready to vote.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we have the language?
JUDGE TINLEY: I would suggest that the language
needs to include, in addition to authorizing the issuance of
that tax note, that I be authorized to execute any necessary,
appropriate documents in connection therewith, including the
providing payment to the Attorney General of Texas its fee
amount of $1,780. Can that get us there?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
2-25-08
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a quick question on the
list. That list is a guide only, correct?
MR. HENDERSON: Yes, sir. There will be,
obviously, some --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Up and down, shifting between
items, if necessary?
' (Mr. Henderson nodded.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further questions or comments?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
22
23
24
25
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Gentlemen,
do we have anything further to come before the meeting that
was posted for 9 a.m. this morning? Hearing nothing further,
that meeting will be adjourned, and we'll return at 1:30 for
a workshop meeting that we have on --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ag Barn stuff.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:45 a.m.)
2-25-08
100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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 28th day of February,
2008.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY : ~~ _
Kathy Ba k, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
2-25-08
ORDER NO. 30736
REPUBLICAN PARTY COUNTY CONVENTION IN DISTRICT
COURTROOM
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the use of the District Courtroom for the Republican Party County
Convention on March 29, 2008, from 8:00 AM to 3:00 PM.
ORDER NO. 30737
ABANDON, VACATE AND DISCONTINUE RF,SERVE STRIP AND
PORTION OF CHURCH STREET
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Set a Public Hearing for April 14, 2008 at 10:10 a.m. to abandon, vacate and
discontinue a 15 ft. reserve strip on the property held by the Tomms in Precinct 2.
ORDER NO. 30738
NAME A PRIVATE ROAD
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve naming a private road Steepside Lane South, Precinct 1.
ORDER NO. 30739
FINAL REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOTS 14, 15, 16, 17 & 18 OF SOLAR
VILLAGE
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the final Revision of Plat for Lots 14, 15, 16, 17 & 18 of Solar Village,
Vol. 4, Page 277, Precinct 1.
ORDER NO. 30740
BIDS FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HVAC AND PEST CONTROL
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Accept all bids and refer them to the Maintenance Director for review and
recommendation:
1. Compton's of Kerrville for electrical, plumbing and HVAC
2. Terminix, local office in Kerrville for pest control
3. Hill Country Pest Control for pest control services
4. D. W. Electric dealing with electrical, plumbing and HVAC
ORDER NO. 30741
FINAL REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOTS SA & SB, GROTTO SPRINGS
RANCHESI
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler/Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the final Revision of Plat for Lots SA & SB, Grotto Springs, Ranches I,
Precinct 3.
ORDER NO. 30742
KERR COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE 2007 RACIAL PROFILING REPORT
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve and accept the Kerr County Sheriff s Office 2007 Racial Profiling Report.
ORDER NO. 30743
NOTICE TO CITY OF KERRVILLE REGARDING ETJ AGREEMENT FOR
SUBDIVISIONS
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve giving notice to the City of Kerrville concerning our current Agreement
within the ETJ and that we would like to modify same, and Commissioners Letz
and Baldwin will represent Commissioners' Court with appropriate County staff to
meet with the City to resolve this issue.
ORDER NO. 30744
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE HILL COUNTRY
COUNCIL ON ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE, INC.
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Memorandum of understanding between Kerr County Court and Hill
Country Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse to apply for funding with the
Department of State Health Services, with one change to the language in the first
paragraph, second line to read, "entering into anon-exclusive agreement" instead
of "this agreement", and authorize County Judge to sign same.

ORDER NO. 30745
ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR DEPARTMENT HEAD FOR COURT
COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioners Oehler/Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Authorize the Human Resources Department to post, in-house, for the open
position of the Department Head for the Court Compliance Department.
ORDER NO. 30746
MERIT RAISE FOR NONA TUCKER
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Amend the previous Court Order #30735, authorizing a salary increase in
step/grade for Nona Tucker, to increase the step/grade from a 17/9 to a 17/ 10, due
to changes in the job description and increased duties.
ORDER NO. 30747
APPOINT MEMBERS TO JOINT COUNTY/CITY COMMITTEES
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Post a Special Commissioners' Court meeting for Thursday, February 28, 2008 at
3:00 p.m. for the purpose of adopting a policy related to the Library, Animal
Control and the Airport and possible members of the Court and/or staff to serve on
that Committee.
ORDER NO. 30748
APPOINT MEMBERS TO JOINT COUNTY/CITY COMMITTEES
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Committee Assignments as follows:
Road & Bridge -Leonard Odom and Judge Pat Tinley
Health Benefits -Eva Hyde and Judge Pat Tinley
Reverse 911 /Warning System -Commissioners Williams and Oehler,
Sheriff Rusty Hierholzer, or his designee, Mr. Ameron,
Ingram Marshall, or his designee, Chief of Police, Fire Chief
and Ray Lynch for the Volunteer Fire Departments
Joint Dispatch, Fire, EMS and Law Enforcement -Commissioner Baldwin,
Sheriff Rusty Hierholzer, 1st Responder Representative and Volunteer
Fire Department Representative
Broadband -John Trolinger
And with Rex Emerson, County Attorney, being the ex-officio for all of the
Committees.
ORDER NO. 30749
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, came to be considered by
the Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General $ 172,588.44
14-Fire Protection $ 1,440.43
15-Road & Bridge $ 38,270.57
50-Indigent Health Care $ 12,110.11
76-Juv Detention Facility $ 2,530.95
TOTAL
$ 226, 940.50
Upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner
Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and
accounts.
ORDER NO. 30750
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 the following monthly reports:
JP #3
JP # 1
District Clerk
JP #2
Constable Pct #2
JP #4
ORDER NO. 30736
REPUBLICAN PARTY COUNTY CONVENTION IN DISTRICT
COURTROOM
Came to be heard this the 25th day of February, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the use of the District Courtroom for the Republican Party County
Convention on March 29, 2008, from 8:00 AM to 3:00 PM.