p3~~10~ REGULAR COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA MONDAY, MARCH 24, 2008, 9:00 A.M. COMMISSIONERS' COURTROOM KERR COUNTY COURTHOUSE KERRVILLE, TEXAS 78028 THIS NOTICE IS POSTED PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. (TITLE 5, CHAPTER 551, GOVERNMENT CODE AND TITLE 5, CHAPTER 552, GOVERNMENT CODE.) This Commissioners' Court will hold a meeting at 9:00 A.M., Monday, March 24, 2008, at the Kerr County Courthouse in the Commissioners' Courtroom. CALL MEETING TO ORDER VISITORS INPUT Citizens wishing to speak on items NOT listed on the regular agenda, please fill out form for consideration at this time. Citizens wishing to speak on items LISTED on the regular agenda, please fill out request form for consideration during discussion on that specific item. In order to expedite the flow of business and to provide all citizens the opportunity to speak, the Judge may impose a three (3) minute limitation on any person addressing the court. COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS r ,..........: ,, a i ~~. ~ n T ~,v~uu~~~slor~erS ariu ~ or ~iir ~,ounty ,,udge inay use this time ~o recognize achievements of persons in their Precinct or to make comments on matters not listed on regular agenda. I CONSIDERATION AGENDA: (Action may be taken on Items listed below) Jl.l Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on request ~~~ from A Child's Place Learning Center to waive the fees 3Q and allow them to use the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center on Tuesday, May 13, 2008. (Sherri Fitzpatrick) riled ~~ t~~, or~._,,,. 7A 0 `~ 1.2 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on request from District Clerk, Linda Uecker, to approve a budget ~~~ amendment to allocate additional $24,000.00 from the X1'(1 $78,629.90 remaining in 28-635-41.1 (Records .~" Preservation) to finish the project of imaging all old records currently on microfilm. (Linda Uecker, District Clerk) ~ 1.3 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on D1~ ~ Department and Animal Co tholEn (Ray Garcia/Janie Roman) 9:30 AM 1.4 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to adopt a Proclamation declaring April 2008 as Child Abuse Prevention & Awareness Month in Kerr County, and ~ ~j approve use of courthouse grounds for a kickoff event on b'~ April lit, 2008, from 5:30-7:00 p.m., and blue ribbons to 3 be tied on courthouse trees during the month of April. (Comm. Baldwin, Pct. 1) ~1.5 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to ~ ~, abandon, vacate, and discontinue Fossler Road. and set ~~~ public hearing for same, Pct. 4. (Leonard Odom) ~1.6 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action concerning ~ the Final Plat of Headwaters Ranch, Phase 1 & 2, Pct. 4. ~~~~ (Leonard Odom) ~i.7 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to open annual bids for Road Base, Cold Mix, Aggregate, ,~fi~1~ ~ Emulsion Oil, and Corrugated Metal Pipe. (Leonard Odom) J1.8 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action concerning J the Western Surety Maintenance Bond #70271788 for Misty Lane in Megan Manor, Pct. 4. (Leonard Odom) ~~ ./ 1.9 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on approving Road List to forward to the City of Kerrville 7j~0~~~ for evaluation of possible annexation. (Comm. Letz, Pct. 3) 1.10 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to set date rr// of May 12, 2008, at 1:30 PM, for a Transportation /~ b Priorities Planning Workshop with Texas Department of ~'~~ Transportation. Other entities that should be invited to attend and participate are: City of Kerrville, UGRA, KEDF, and Kerrville Area Chamber of Commerce. / (Comm. Williams, Pct. 2) J 1.11 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to set date c)'"" of April 14, 2008, at 1:30 PM, for a workshop presentation on the possible establishment of "Paddling ~ Trails" in conjunction with Texas Parks and Wildlife, along stretches of the Guadalupe River in Kerr County. (Comm. Williams, Pct. 2) J 1.12 Consider, discuss and take appropriate action on updating a~ d overseeing Kerr County website. (Comm. Letz, Pct. 3 (J 0 I ,~ 1~ Consider, discuss, and. take appropriate action to approve the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Regional ~~~ Water and Wastewater Matters, and Range ~j Improvements. (Comm. Williams, Pct. 2/Comm. Letz, Pct. 3 ) 10:45 AM J1.14 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to designate by Resolution Grantworks as the planning ~~$' ~ service provider for the 2007 Texas Community ~j Development Block Grant Colonia Planning Project 727125. (Conan. Williams, Pct. 2) 10:45 A 1.15 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to ~~~ designate by Resolution authorized signatory (County Judge, County Treasurer, County Auditor) for the 2007 O~) Texas CDBG Colonia Planning Project 727125 (Comm. 3 Williams, Pct. 2) 1.1:00 AM 1.16 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on ~ Resolution from the Texas Farm Bureau concerning ,~O~l g eminent domain. (Comm. Letz, Pct. 3) 1.17 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to finalize job descriptions of Human Resources Director and J{ g ~ employees of the Human Resources Department. ~J' ~ (Executive Session, as needed)(Eva Hyde) J 1.18 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action regarding ~~~ real estate transactions. (Executive Session) (Comm. ~( Williams, Pct. 2) ~~ ~L19 Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on the Road and Bridge Audit. The internal audit for the Road ~~/~' and Bridge Office has been completed. (Paula J. Hargis) ~0 CLOSED MEETING A closed meeting will subject(s): be held concerning the following II. EXECUTIVE SESSION: This meeting is authorized by Section 551, Government Code and Section 552, Government Code. 2.1 Consultation with Attorney and all pending and possible litigation as per Section 551.071, Government Code. (County Attorney) 2.2 Personnci Matters as per Section S~i.074, Govei=rliiient Code. (County Judge) 2.3 Deliberations Regarding Economic Development Negotiations as per Section 551.087, Government Code. (County Judge) 2.4 Deliberation Regarding Real Property as per Section 551.072, Government Code. (County Judge) OPEN MEETING An open meeting will be held concerning the following subject(s): III. ACTION AGENDA: 3.1 Action as may be required on matters discussed in Executive Session. IV. APPROVAL AGENDA: 4.1 Pay bills. 307 Fla a' 3 t~~0'C~ 4.2 Budget Amendments. (County Auditor) 4.3 Late Bills. (County Auditor) ~~ ~ ~ ,1 t.~,~0~ 4.4 Approve and accept Monthly Reports. 3 0~ 7 V. INFORMATION AGENDA: 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee Assignments. 5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads. 5.3 Reports from Boards, Commissions and Committees. a). City/County Joint Projects or Operations Reports b). Other PUB~~C PARTICIPATION FORI~n' ~~ ~ FOR KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COURT INSTRUCTIONS: Fill out all appropriate blanks. Please print or write legibly. Present to the COUNTY CLERK prior to the time that the Agenda Item (or Items) you wish to address are discussed. If you are handing out any material or documents to the Court, please make sure you have one extra copy for the Clerk to ensure that one is put into the record. Name: ,G~ ~ ~. Address: ,~/~ Telephone: ,~3v `~ ~5~~ ,,~~ 7rZ Place of Employment: 8~~n~~ ,~~~ Employment Telephone: .~3~ 3 ~ 7 S S~ Do you represent any particular group or organization? Yes No ,/ If you represent a group or organization, please state the name, address and telephone number of such group or organization: Which Agenda Item (or Items) do you wish to address: 1, Jr' ~, ~~ In general, are you for or against such Agenda Item (or Items)? For Against ignature NOTE: This Public Participation Forrn must be presented to the County Clerk prior to the time the agenda item(s) are discussed. Once you reach the podium please state your name and who/what you represent clearly for the court reporter to accurately record who you are Commissioners' Court 3-10-2008 Reference was made to most counties have fence out; fence in laws. I want to know what counties. There are very many counties in Texas. The counties in the immediate area don't have these laws, or else they aren't enforced. Mr. Letz, Why haven't you started this process on the road you live on (Lane Valley)? How about Mr. Dudley Snyder? Is it because he has a lot of money and you are afraid to approach him? There is a much larger subdivision next to your property. Did you sell property to the BOERNE FALLS RANCH development? Why isn't Lane Valley under this road improvement. How about Mr. Charles Lewis? Have you notified him and Mr. Milton Grammar on South Fork about the cattle guards coming out? There have been two houses built on the property Henry Bohnert and Richard Bohnert sold during the last four years. One of those houses was completed in February 2008. The owners have moved in their house after the first of February 2008. I don't know where you get the idea that Henry and I have created a traffic problem on Wilson Creek Road. I think you are holding a grudge against us and the people we sold property to. Who are you to determine if we still have unsold lots? That is news to me. Did you have some of our property surveyed and put lots ~ for sale? Did you have it platted? Henry nor I have made any attempts to sell more property. Where the traffic has increased is East of us on Wilson Creek Road, Mr. Belin has added a house next to Clarence Burow. Mr. Frank Manitzas has added a house next to the road, 535 Wilson Creek Road. There has been one house I know of built on Sakewits Lane, Mr. Vance Kerbow. Mr. Gordon Green has built or may still be in the process of building on Wilson Creek Road. All of this building has been done since we sold our property. That is where some of the increased traffic is, and the road is only 31 feet wide most of that area and all the way to Schloeder Road the fences are no more than 35 feet apart. That includes the road by Mr. Douglas Koennecke, if you don't know who he is, he is the Kerr County employee who has been dictating (to the people we sold property to) they need to fence the road out and told them where to put the fence, and by the way, where he dictated to them where they had to put the fence was approximately ten feet beyond the Kerr county easement line. I challenge each of you commissioners, the county attorney, and county judge to take a trip to Wilson Creek Road and see for yourself what is going on. Jonathan Letz is trying to make an example at our expense. Kerr County currently has the widest easement on Wilson Creek Road on our property and the property we sold, and yet you people aren't satisfied. It is time you go bark up someone else's tree, and start compensating us for damages, and since you are the ones who DICTATED to the Williamson's and Simpkins' where to put their fences you should step up and take responsibility to put the fences where they belong. Page 1 of 2 richard bohnert From: "Jonathan Letz" To: "Rex Emerson" Cc: "'richard bohnert"' Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 3:53 PM Subject: FW: Wilson Creek Road-constuction projects Riex; terse see the email from Richard Bohnert below. I am forwarding to you for response. Thanks, Jonathan From: richard bohnert [mailto:rbohnert@hctc.net] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 12:16 PM To: 3firidu ian~ Let-C Subject: Re: Wilson Creek Road-constuction projects Jonathan Letz, please send me a copy of the law that states a county does not have to notify property owners during constuction projects on private owned property where the county has an easement for a road over that property, which is fenced between owners. The cattle guard is the fence across the road. Sincerely, Richard Bohnert ----- Original Message -- From: Jonathan Letz __- - -- To: Richard bohnert ;Henry Bohnert ;Gary Simpkins_ ;Bryant Williamson ;John Merritt Cc: Rex Emerson Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 6:42 AM Subject: Wilson Creek Road Gentlemen, have received emails and / or phone calls from you in response to a letter you received from Kerr County Road and Bridge Department dated, January 28, 2008; and Concerning road work currently underway on Wilson Creek Road. These two issues are not related and will be discussed and handled as separate issues. First, concerning the letter you all received from Kerr County Road and Bridge Department, dated January 28, 2008. This letter was sent at the direction of Kerr County Commissioner's Court based on the advise from the Kerr County Attorney and discussion with the Kerr County Subdivision Administrator concerning an easement request from Hill Country Telephone Cooperative. This decision was based on information obtained from Kerr County Real Property Records, that included deeds and survey plats, Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations and other information contained.. in our files._tt was determined that the property subdivisions 'referrez! to in the above et#er vio{ated Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulafrons and Mate -Law. I visited with County Attorney Rex Emerson again on February 12, 2008 and his opinion has not changed. have no problem recommending you have some time to decide how best to correct this violation. Neither I nor any other Kerr County officials or employees have ever said or implied that this was done intentionally. It appears someJmiscommunicationrnay have been a`factor~in thissituation. However, unfilthts issue is resolved sany property transfers, applications for On-Site Septic Facilliiwrs ter other county relatedpermits may be delayed. Please, contact me by the end of February and give me an update. This issue must be resolved and in the interim MCTC's fiber optic plans will like{y be delayed in your area. The project to improve and reconstruct Wilson Creek Road has been underway since last year. This project was under taken to improve health and safety concerns along Wilson Creek Road. With new subdivisions being developed and additional homes built the truck and car traffic has increased on this road. The area where the construction is currently#2iking~-#laae°has~greatty changed°in the recent-years laryety due to the 3/24/2008 development of this property by Richard and Henry Bohnert. Within this area Kerr County has received additional right-of way and there are now additional traffic and drainage concerns. The majority of this property has now been fenced along Wilson Creek Road. The three cattle guards that were removed were part of this overall road improvement project. The cattle guard removal was not related to the subdivision platting matters addressed above. Based on my conversations with Kerr County Road and Bridge Department administrator, there are no plans to re-install the cattle guards that were removed. I concur with this decision. If you would like the Commissioner's Court to review this matter I will place this item on the Commissioner's Court agenda and you may present your case. While the county is not required to consult with adjoining property owners during construction projects, 1 do believe more could have been done to keep you informed. Hence, I would like to apologize on behalf of Kerr County for any inconvenience this may have caused. I believe there is some misinformation and misunderstanding as to "open range" law in Kerr County. The mere fact that a cattle guard is on a road, especially a county maintained road, does not mean there is necessarily "open range." Further, such a designation does not relief the livestock owner or property owner of liability or responsibility for their livestock. The designation of "open range" does not primarily relate to road issues, but rather whether a livestock owner must "fence in" or "fence out" their livestock. A review of records has not provided a conclusive determination of "open range" for this area of Kerr County. Texas stock laws and "open range" issues are very complicated and are based on local elections held in the late 1800's and early 1900's within the county and each election covered only certain types of livestock. I will be glad to meet with you collectively or individually to further explain the subdivision platting violation, the Wilson Creek Road project or "open range" issues. If you have any questions, please contact me at your convenience. My cell phone is (830) 739-1699, office 792-2216 and home 995-2120. Your truly, Jonathan Letz Kerr County Commissioner Pat. 3 3/24/2008 rake richard bohnert From: "Jonathan Letz" To: "Rex Emerson" Cc: "'richard bohnert"' Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 3:56 PM Subject: FW: Wilson Creek Road-Rules Regulations STATE LAW Rex, Please see another email from Richard Bohnert. I am forwarding to you for response or would you rather I respond. We can discuss on Monday. Thanks, Jonathan From: richard bohnert [mailto:rbohnert@hctc.net] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 11:57 AM To: Jonathan Letz Subject: Re: Wilson Creek Road--Rules Regulations STATICLAW Jonathan Letz, Please outline what state law (section, chapter, etc) Henry and 1 violated when we sold property that is accessed by Wilson Creek Road. 'The property that Wilson Creek Road is on was sold with the property we sold. There are four seperate properties that were surveyed and sold. Also in the message you sent there was a violation of Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations, but you failed to outline which ones were violated. Please send me a message identifying these violations. Sincerely, Richard Bohnert -- Original Message ----- From: Jonathan Letz __ _ . To: Richard bohnerf ;Hen_ry Bohnert ; Ga_ry___Sim~?kins ; Bryant__ _Williamson ;John Merritt Cc: Rex Emerson Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 6:42 AM Subject: Wilson Creek Road Gentlemen, I have received emails and / or phone calls from you in response to a letter you received from Kerr County Road and Bridge Department dated, January 28, 2008; and concerning road work currently underway on Wilson Creek Road. These two issues are not related and will be discussed and handled as separate issues. First, concerning the letter you all received from Kerr County Road and Bridge Department, dated January 28, 2008. This letter was sent at the direction of Kerr County Commissioner's Court based on the advise from the Kerr County Attorney and discussion with the Kerr County Subdivision Administrator concerning an easement request from Hill Country Telephone Cooperative. This decision was based on information obtained from Kerr County Real Property Records, that included deeds and survey plats, Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations and other information contained in our files. It was determined that the property subdivisions referred to in the above letter violated Kerr County Subdivision Rules and Regulations and State Law. 1 visited with County Attorney Rex Emerson again on February 12, 2008 and his opinion has not changed. I have no problem recommending you have some time to decide how best to correct this violation. Neither I nor any other Kerr County officials or employees have ever said or implied that this was done intentionally. It appears some miscommunication may have been a factor in this situation. However, until this issue is resolved any property transfers, applications for On-Site Septic Facilities or other county related permits may be delayed. Please, contact me by the end of February and give me an update. This issue must be resolved and in the interim HCTC's fiber optic plans will likely be delayed in your area. The project to improve and reconstruct Wilson Creek Road has been underway since last year. This project 3/24/2008 rage i or i Jody Grinstead From: Eva Hyde [ehyde@co.kerr.tx.us] Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 10:45 AM To: ptinley@co.kerr.tx.us; 'Jody Grinstead' Cc: 'Eva Hyde' Subject: FW: C~ ne i ooperative Meeting Minutes - Att nts: COK MEETING MINUTES 031208.pdf Judge, Do we need an agenda item to "report" back to the Court on the findings of the City's consultant or can this be done during the reports portion? Thanks, From: Kim Meismer lmailto:kim.meismer@kerrvilletx.gov] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 1:17 PM To: Eva Hyde; ptinley@co.kerr.tx.us Subject: FW: City County Benefit Cooperative Meeting Minutes - 031208 Eva/Judge Tinley, Attached are the minutes from the City County Benefit Cooperative Meeting held on March 12, 2008. This will be presented to City Council along with other joint services on March 25, 2008. If you have any questions, please feel free~to contact me. Thank you. Sincerely, Kimberly Meismer Director of Human Resources 8 Administration City of Kerrville 800 Junction Hwy. Kerrville, Texas 78028 Ph: 830-792-8340 Cell: 830-377-7691 Fax: 830-792-8346 03/20/2008 CCBS CITY-CQUiVTY $ENEF~TS SERVICES ---- ~~, 245 Commerce Green Blvd., Suite z90 Phone: (800) 308-2896/Direct: (28]) 295-3000 Sugar Land, Texas 77478 Fax: {281) 245-3020/Bab.Treacy@c-cbs.org Meeting Minutes -March 12.2008 A meeting was held at the City of Kerrville City Hall on March 12, 2008 at 3:00 p.m. Attendees were: Kerr County Citv of Kerrville Honorable Judge Pat Tinley Klm Meismer, Director of Human Resources & Administration Eva Hyde -Human Resource Manager City-Count' Benefits Services Robert Treacy -City of Kerrville Beneft Consultant The meeting was to discuss the results of a preliminary review of basic criteria established to measure the City/County compatibility in forming a Chapter 791/271 Interiocal Purchasing Cooperative for the purpose of securing a group medical insurance plan. The objective would be to form one group in order to spread claim cost over a larger group, reduce retention and pooling charges, and stabilize costs over the future. Three {3) criteria were established to measure compatibility prior to engaging a full comprehensive Request For Proposal (RFP) process which would result in staff hours and additional consulting fees. Thane criteria were: • Benefitslcontract terms • Demographic actuarial premium ratios • Per Employee Per Month {PEPM) Claim costs BENEFITS/CONTRACT TERMS A comparison was made of the two flagship plans {see Exhibit 1 }offered to the plan members of the City and County. The City and County offer PPO plans. The City offers a dual choice Standard PPOI High Deductible PPO-HRA plan with 83% of City employees in the lower deductible Standard PPO plan. The County offers one (1) total replacement High Deductible PPO-HRA plan. The City and County offer extremely competitive products that provide a very high level of cost/benefit value to the plan members. In comparing the City/County plans, each entity has their strengths and weaknesses measuring the top benefits that drive claim costs. The overall comparison would necessitate a willingness for both entities to offer dual choices to the group based upon the differing product platforms and benefit levels along with a need to be flexible in arriving at two plans that bath entities could agree on. Those two products would be offered to all members of both entities. 2. There are additional issues complicating this study: a. The City has an anniversary date of October 1, 2008 (same as fiscal year) and the County; January 1, 2009. b. It is recommended that bath entities terminate their participating contracts and move into the fully insured arena for a minimum of two years due to the complexities of forming a Chapter 172 Self Funded Cooperative program. The County i5 currently contracted under a partially self funded contract which could jeopardize the reinsurance contract should they move their renewal date up to October 1, 2008 to coincide with the City. The City/County would need to measure whether going fully insured is in their best interest. c. The City has plan year deductible and aut of pocket accumulators. The County has calendar year accumulators. These issues can be managed, but each entity would have to be prepared to give and take financially and structurally in order to overcome these obstacles. Meeting Minutes Page 2 MANUAL DEMOGRAPHIC PREMIUM RATIOS This analysis could prove to be a major obstacle for joining these two entities into a collective risk. (see Exhibit 2) Each group forwarded their census information broken out by active employees and activelretirees. The City does not cover retirees. The County does cover retirees. A manual premium calculation is developed using actuarial statistics including age, gender, dependents, standard benefit design, area cast factors, and activelretirees. Once that collective premium structure is developed blending the City/County demographics, each group is then run through the same variable to develop their separate rate to see how it compares with the blended manual. A ratio less than 1.00 indicates the individual group has a premium That is less than the collective manual. A ratio higher than 1.00 indicates the group has a higher cost factor than the blended manuals and is responsible for increasing the blended composite premium rate. The employee (EE) and employee + spouse {ES) premium ratio for the City is well under 1.00 and all others are at 1.00. The County on the other hand has much higher cost adjustment for these two demographic facts, as much as 26-34% higher. The County active workforce is older than the City and the County retiree participation only compounds this differential. These two groups are not demographically similar enough to be a good match. PER EMPLOYEE PER MONTH (PEPM1 CLAIM COSTS The last analysis of the preliminary review is to compare a PEPM claim cost over the past two years of claims performance to see whether these two groups are running in a similar manner. Claim costs drive 80% of the cost of a group medical pion. The City in#ormation has been provided to the consultant. At this date in time, the County has not provided their information to the consultant. Indications are that the claim costs are going to re-direct the manual demographic data Hated above which will show that the County has a higher claim cost PEPM than the City. Actual claims data from the County is needed in order to Complete this portion of the analysis. CONCLUSION Collective purchasing for the sake of collective purchasing is not a good idea. The collective group needs to be fairly homogeneous and ! do not see this so far in our analysis. This could change over time as the City moves towards mandated retiree coverage as they approach 25,000 citizens under local government code Chapter 175. The development of a collective RFP will be time consuming and there will be consulting fees involved. 1 am,sr+6t~onf;dent that this exercise will be worth the Cost. Sincerely, Bob Tr acy, LHIt Partner EXHIBIT 1 BENEFITS ~ C1TY COUNTY Lifetime Maximum $1,000,000 $2,000,000 Annual Year Deductible (Famil $500 3x Ian r 1011 $1,000 3x calendar r 4th Quarter Roll Over es es 'Co-Insurance 20% 10% Annual Out of Pocket (Famil $3,000 {3x $2,000 3x) Deductible Included Out of Pocket no es Ph sician Office Visit Goa s • Primar $25 $30110% • Specialty $35 $30/10% Routine Lab/Radiolo Out Patient • Independent no charge $30110% • Physician no charge $30110% -Hospital no charge Deductible / 10% Preventive Annual Benefit $500 $500 Wellness Pro rams a e 43 Preventive Colonosco ies no char a Deductible / 10% Alter • Testing $35 copay $30 copay110% • Serum no charge $30 copay/10% Hos ital ER Treatment Deductible / 20% $50 co a / Ded /10% RX Plan $10/$30/$50 $10!$25!$35 / DAW2 Mail Order (2x co a s Mail Order - In redient Cost In Patien# Rehabilitation Services unlimited 60 da s In Patient Mental Nervous 45 da s calendar 30 da s calendar/60da s lifetime Out Patient Mental Nervous $35 co a 160 visits 50%; Max Allowable $70 Out Patient Ph sical Thera 60 visits 60 visits Spinal Mani ulation Included in Ph sical Thera 30 visits Vision Care Benefit n/a no charge; Max Allowable $60 Kerr Cty.COK.Benefits Comparison 2008 c~HIBIT 2 Kerrville/Karr County Manual Risk Analysis Active ~nly Kerrville Kerr Co. EE 0.92 1.07 EE + Sp 0.88 1,16 EE + Ch 1 1.01 EE + Fm 1.02 0.94 >55 20.47% 26.75% Active & Retiree Kerrville Kerr Co. EE 0.85 1.11 EE + 5p 0.85 1.19 EE + Ch 1.00 1.01 EE + Fm 1.02 0.94 >55 20.93% 32.75% EXHIBIT 2 Entity: City of i(errville Active # of # of # of # of # of AGE Male EES Comp Dep Sp Only Ch Only Fm Only <35 35 33 7 13 13 36 - 45 14 46 2 21 23 46 - 50 7 32 1 17 14 51 - 55 15 8 4 1 3 56 - 60 11 9 6 0 3 61-65 5 2 2 0 0 6B - 70 0 1 0 0 1 > 71 0 0 0 0 0 Tota! Male 87 131 22 52 57 # of # of # of # of # of AGE Female EES Comp Dep Sp Only Ch Only Fm Only <35 15 10 1 8 1 38-45 10 10 1 6 3 46-50 3 4 1 2 1 5i - 55 2 2 1 1 0 56 - 60 6 4 4 0 0 81 - 65 3 2 1 1 0 $6 - 70 1 1 1 0 0 >71 0 0 0 0 0 Tota! Female 40 33 10 18 5 Total All 127 184 32 70 &2 Note - # of Male and Female EES is Sum of EE, EE+Sp, EE+Ch & EE+Fm Note - Do Not enter in to Comp Dep Column COK.PY08-O8. WORKING ~ILE.ELIGIBLITYCENSUS 2008 EXHIBIT 2 Entity: Kerr County Active # of # of # of # of # of AGE Male EES Comp Dep Sp Oniy Ch Only Fm Only <35 19 10 1 5 4 36 - 45 16 14 2 7 5 46 - 50 13 5 1 2 2 5i-55 12 8 3 3 2 56 - 60 9 2 1 1 0 81 - 85 5 2 2 0 0 $6 - 70 0 1 1 0 0 > 71 1 1 1 0 0 Total Male 75 43 12 18 13 # of # of # of # of # of AGE Female EES Comp Dep 5p Only Ch Only Frn Only <35 16 7 0 5 2 36 - 45 20 12 0 8 4 4S - 50 13 6 1 3 2 59-55 6 7 4 2 1 58 - 60 15 3 3 0 0 69-65 7 2 2 0 0 66 - 70 4 1 1 0 0 >T 1 1 1 1 0 0 Total Female 82 39 12 18 9 Total All 157 82 24 36 22 Note - # of Male and Female EES is Sum of EE, EE+Sp, EE+Ch & EE+Fm Note - Do Not enter in to Comp Dep Column Kerr Cty.PY08-09.Working ElJgi6ility 2008 EXHIBIT 2 Entity: Kerr County Retirees # of # of # of # of # of AGE Male EES Comp Dep Sp Only Ch Only Fm Only X35 0 0 0 0 0 36 - 45 D 0 0 0 0 46 - 50 D 0 0 D 0 51-55 0 D 0 D 0 56 - 60 0 D 0 D 0 61-65 D D 0 0 D 66 - 70 2 D 0 0 0 >71 4 0 0 0 0 Toiat Mate 6 0 U 0 0 #of #of #of #of #of AGE Female EES Comp Dep Sp Only Ch Only Fm Only <35 0 0 0 0 0 36 - 45 0 0 0 0 4 46 - 5D 0 0 0 0 0 51-55 0 0 0 0 D 56 - 60 2 0 0 0 0 61-65 D D 0 0 D 66 - 70 2 D 0 0 0 >71 6 1 1 0 D Total Female 10 1 1 0 0 Tota! Al! 16 1 1 0 0 Note - # of Male and Female EES is Sum of EE, EE+Sp, EE+Ch & EE+Fm Note - Do Not enter in #o Comp Dep Column Kerr Cty. PYDB-D9. Working Eligibilty 2008