1
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
Tuesday, May 27, 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

0
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
May 27, 2008
--- Commissioners' Comments
1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action
regarding new leash law at Flat Rock Park
1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
request for resolution in support of utilizing
a portion of annual license renewal fees to
Texas Parks and Wildlife for predator control
1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
solicit Requests for Proposal and/or Requests
for Qualifications to provide medical services
to inmates at Kerr County Jail
1.4 Open bids for 4,400 square feet of concrete for
storage area at Kerr County Fair Grounds; take
appropriate action to award bid and authorize
construction
1.5 Open bids for 648 square feet of concrete sidewalk
at Kerr County Courthouse and take appropriate
action to award bid and authorize construction
1.6 Open bids for one 6-ton air conditioning unit &
four 8 1/2-ton air conditioning units and take
appropriate action to award bid, in whole or in
part, as applicable
1.9 Consider/discuss and take appropriate action to
open and award bid for a C7500 truck equipped
with an aerial bucket and chip box
1.10 Public Hearing for revision of plat, Ingram Hills,
Lot 25, located in Precinct 4
l.ll Public Hearing for revision of plat for Lots 23
and 24W in The Reserve of Falling Water, located
in Precinct 3
1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to name
a private road per 911 guidelines
1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve final plat of Headwaters Ranch, Phase 3
PAGE
6
15
20
41,
107
42,
108
44
45,
112
46
47
47
48
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
I N D E X (Continued)
May 27, 2008
1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve actuarial services for GASB 45 with
Gabriel Roeder Smith & Company and interlocal
Agreement with North Central Texas Council
of Governments
1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
proposed concept for revision of plat for Live
Springs Ranch
1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
variance to postpone construction improvements
to Chisolm Trail and portions of Sedalia Trail
in Live Springs Ranch
1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
negotiations with City of Kerrville on airport
and other matters concerning airport projects
1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
accept a gift of artwork from Kerr County
Historical Commission
1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
review services of GovDeals, Inc.
1.18 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
medical insurance lab claims against our policy
4.1 Pay Bills
4.2 Budget Amendments
4.3 Late Bills
4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports
5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee
Assignments
5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads
1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve moving election duties to Voter
Registrar's office and one employee from
County Clerk's office (Executive Session)
PAGE
49
56
61
66
76
87
92
114
124
125
128
25
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
I N D E X (Continued)
May 27, 2008
PAGE
1.20 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
transfer an employee from County Clerk's office
to Court Compliance Department (Executive Session) ---
1.21 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
transfer an employee from Environmental Health
Department to Court Compliance Department
(Executive Session) ---
3.1 Action as may be required on matters discussed
in Executive Session 135
--- Adjourned 146
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
On Tuesday, May 27, 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: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the
Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled and posted for this
time and date, Tuesday, May 27th, 2008, at 9 a.m. It is that
time now. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Thank you very
much. If you would all rise for a word of prayer, we have a
special guest today to lead us in a word of prayer, and it's
the only judge that I've ever seen on Oprah. (Laughter.)
David Billeiter.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. Thanks, David.
JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, if there's any member
of the audience or the public that wishes to be heard on any
item that is not a listed agenda item, feel free to come
forward at this time and tell us what's on your mind. If you
wish to be heard on an agenda item, we'd ask that you fill
out a participation form. There should be some at the back
of the room. If there are no forms, or if you haven't filled
5-27-08
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
one out and we get to an agenda item that you wish to be
you do have the opportunity to be heard on that item. We
prefer that we have a participation form so that -- it helps
me so that we don't go by that item and -- and skip over you,
and I don't want to do that. But right now, if there's any
member of the public that wishes to be heard on any matter
that is not a listed agenda item, feel free to come forward
at this time. Seeing no one coming forward, we will move on.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, thank you. I have
one issue that I want to bring up, and it's really, really
exciting. This Thursday, in this courtroom, at 7 p.m.,
T.C.E.Q., better known in this room as T-Quack, will be here
along with many of our citizens or many of my constituents in
Precinct 1. Out on Harper Road, the -- the Christian camp
out there, Hill Country -- the Hill Country camp -- Pearl
Wheat, the old Pearl Wheat camp, they've built a new O.S.S.F.
treatment facility out there, and it's -- it treats the
effluent and then dumps right out into Town Creek. So, there
are some natives that are restless over that. So, between
the State Representative and myself, we have rounded up this
-- I think it's going to be a pretty good-sized meeting with
all the players to talk about this new fancy treatment plant,
and we'd be delighted to have y'all come and see it. I mean,
s-2~-os

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it's not every day we get to talk about sewer, but it's
almost every day. And it would be a great opportunity for
you guys to -- to be a part of that to see -- see the new --
the new style of treatment facilities and see how the State
handles those kind of things. I'm pretty excited about it,
to see how all that works out, and -- and to see Dr. Rector
challenge some things, and it's going to be interesting.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Who's upstream from there?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who cares? A creek's a
creek.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's Town Creek, right?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's Town Creek. Dumps
right into the Guadalupe. That's all I wanted to talk about
this morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It was a great Memorial Day
weekend, starting with the Bank of the Hills fly-over and
memorial service they had on Thursday. I had the opportunity
to be at the Arts and Crafts Fair for a couple days, and that
was fun. I understand they did very well this time, as
opposed to last -- last year because of weather, so it was
good. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Couple of things. I thought it
was interesting; I read in the County Magazine -- I don't
5-27-08
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
know if y'all read it, but I thought it was interesting for
the public as well -- a lawsuit. Oral arguments were held
before the Supreme Court -- U.S. Supreme Court in March, and
the name of the case is Rothgery vs. Gillespie County, is the
case, and it has a possible very significant budget impact to
Kerr County and all counties in Texas. It goes to when
people are entitled to indigent defense, whether it's after
indictment or as soon as they're arrested. Interesting case
that our neighbors up north took all the way to the Supreme
Court. I don't know -- I don't know that it was their choice
to take it that far, but they got that far. Also --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait, wait. And Gillespie
County says that it's after indictment?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: After indictment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that's the argument?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the argument. And it's
-- and it's -- the guess is, based on the article, it's a
very -- it's going to be very close. There are two justices
that are pretty clearly siding with the counties, that it
should be after indictment, and there are two justices that
are very -- think it should be after arrest or at arrest, and
there are three that are on the fence. And it's one of those
that -- did that add up to right number of justices? Might
be four -- four of them on the fence. And two of those are
probably leaning towards the county idea, but the other two,
5-27-08
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
it's a real question. It's unclear as to how -- it may come
down to Justice Kennedy and Justice --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Scalia?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, not Scalia. Souter?
Souter, I believe, as to how they're -- how it's going to end
up, and that's -- that's not real comforting, that those two
are the two that are going to be making this decision.
Another issue, we had a meeting of the -- it's called the
Hill Country Coalition of Counties. It was a week ago last
Friday out at Schreiner. Interesting meeting, and we have
progressed to a point where Judge Sumner and primarily myself
hammered out three pages that are going to be given to Jim
Allison to write -- to look at writing legislation. I was
able to get most of the -- what I consider bad stuff taken
out of this, which was about a page of it, but there's
still -- and the three items that we're looking at pursuing
are safe roads funds, which is a -- some sort of a system to
allow counties to collect fees from developers for
subdivision developments that have an impact on county roads.
I think pretty much every development that we have going on
in this county almost right now are accessed by county roads,
and the county's left holding the bag trying to figure out
how to upgrade those roads. Some sort of a fund or fee to
developers to help pay for that. Also for drainage issues.
There's an issue of noncompatible land use; that if
5-27-08
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
you have an existing residential development and a commercial
development that is not compatible with that, that a buffer
has to be upgraded between that commercial and residential
density-slash-lot size, to give counties some explicit
authority to do both, set lot sizes and/or density. These
are -- all three of these are being targeted just for hill
country counties to have just as additional authority. The
lot size, we get there in Kerr County, as most counties in
the hill country do, by using water availability. But some
they're getting rather -- in the Marble Falls area
especially, where they had a lot of flooding, which that
flooding wasn't due to this, but density is on quarter-acre
lots. People are putting in these private sewer systems, and
from a drainage standpoint, it's really not being taken into
account. So, trying to figure out how to get some sort of
authority by -- drainage is the basis for it, really, to set
lot sizes in hill country counties. Those are the three
things.
I'll have a copy of this out to the other
5-27-08
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it into probably two pages of talking points that will be
presented to -- what's his name? -- Senator Lucio's committee
Those are the two
this, but the sort of consensus of the meeting was to ask him
to make this presentation before the subcommittee, Senator
Lucio's committee. He didn't know that till just now. But,
criticism/complaint directed primarily at the Kerrville
Independent School District. I think it's absolutely
terrible that they had school yesterday. I think it is --
you know, we talk so much about family values and things of
that nature, and to have businesses, much less, you know,
schools ignoring a really important day like Memorial Day
just really got me. And I think that -- I would encourage
everyone calling your school board members and complaining.
No wonder we're having problems in schools, when they don't
even teach the basic values of this country, and I think that
includes celebrating Memorial Day. That really annoys me.
And from what I understand, they've also decided to hold
class on Labor Day next year -- or this summer. And they
also don't give off Veterans Day, so I think that it's -- it
5-27-08
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
really says something about our trustees when they don't
acknowledge some of the most important days in our country.
That's it.
I JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Really not a whole lot. I
think Jonathan took most of my time, but I'm glad he did. I
had a good friend that had his dog get bit by a rattlesnake
over the weekend, and I found out that there is a shot that a
vet can give them now that will take care of that venom when
it's -- if they get bit, and will, a lot of times, save their
life. And I don't know how long it's been available, but
evidently not very long. And this particular incident, the
dog was bit right on the nose and into his tongue, and so
that's about as bad as you can get, and -- unless you get bit
by the heart. But, anyway, for people that have animals, we
evidently -- you know, we do have rattlesnakes and we do have
other poisonous snakes, and -- and that is available, and I
would encourage everybody to go get it done. I'm going to
get mine done tomorrow, because -- and I had no idea. I
thought it was a thing you did after they got bit, but
actually, it's something that can be done prior to it that
will help them in case they do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh, like a vaccine?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Kind of a vaccine.
JUDGE TINLEY: Immunization, mm-hmm.
5-27-08
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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, anyway, if the newspaper
would put that in there, that may put some people on notice
that that is available, and it could save your dog.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that only as to rattlesnakes, or
any -- any type of poisonous --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it's just a venomous
snake, but I know it for sure on rattlesnakes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, I would encourage people
to do that to basically try to save their dog before they get
bit instead of trying to save them afterwards. That was it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, before -- before you
take your time, Commissioner Letz mentioned quarries, and
Commissioner Baldwin mentioned T.C.E.Q. That reminded me
that T.C.E.Q. has issued a ruling on the Wheatcraft issues,
air quality permit application, and it is not to the liking
of the locals, as you could well imagine. I believe there's
a meeting scheduled sometime this week. The folks had
retained an attorney to help represent them in terms of
whether or not they want to seek a contested case hearing,
and there may be some effort to do that. The County doesn't
particularly have a role in it, because I think if you're
seeking a contested case hearing, you have to be an affected
party and have a -- be a property owner, for example,
contiguous to the quarry or something like that. And so the
5-27-08
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
County really is not an affected party in the context of the
law or the regulations of T.C.E.Q. So, anyhow, that's what's
happening in that regard.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. We had our annual
Memorial Day event out on the west side of the courthouse
square near the war memorial, and I was happy to see members
of the Court there. And I -- I may have opened Pandora's
box, but I think it was something that needed to be done.
The war memorial out there is not complete. It needs to be
expanded to provide space to place the names of eligible Kerr
Countians who have given their life in service and conflicts.
And I asked the veterans' groups and veterans and family
members and whomever to work with us to give us that
information, give us their ideas on -- on the expansion of
that memorial, so that's coming. And if anybody asks you who
opened that can of worms, it was me, and I'll take
responsibility for it, but it's the right thing to do and we
need to do it. So, that's something that we should hope to
see occur in the future. It may -- may be that the Court
needs to go back and revisit the -- the policy on
eligibility. I've heard some various discussions about that.
And probably as part and parcel of that, we need to go back
and look at what was the eligibility of those that are
already there. What -- what was their status that -- that
placed them on there, relative to their residency here in
5-27-08
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
this county? But we'll work through those issues, and -- and
we'll get there. Let's get on with our agenda. The first
item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action regarding a new leash law at Flat Rock
Lake Park. Sandra Shelby asked that this item be placed on
the agenda. Is Ms. Shelby present?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we know what she was --
what her concern was?
MS. GRINSTEAD: I don't. She just said she wanted
action taken, but she said she would be here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: You've not heard from her that she's
been detained or otherwise not available?
(Ms. Grinstead shook her head negatively.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you have a phone number
for her?
MS. GRINSTEAD: I don't.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's pass on that one at the
moment, and if she does appear, we can take that matter up
again. We'll go to Item 2; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on request for resolution in support of
utilizing a portion of the annual renewal fees to Texas Parks
and Wildlife for predator control. I placed this on the
agenda at the request of a county commissioner in Sutton
5-27-08
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
County who is attempting to gather some support for a
movement to take part of the licensing fees, a portion as yet
undetermined, to be placed in a fund for predator control.
Commissioner John Wade, the Commissioner in Precinct 2 in
Sutton County, also is on the Texas Board of -- Texas Sheep
and Goat Predator Management Board, and indicated that the
Texas Sheep and Goat Raisers Association and the Texas Sheep
and Goat Predator Management Board has, in fact, already
endorsed this proposal. So, at his request, I brought it
before the Court for their consideration and action, if so
desired.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I couldn't agree
day-to-day basis. But there's a lot -- I think there's a lot
more folks in our community or in our county that -- that are
still ranch -- that still ranch and still have livestock,
more than we hear about and more than we think that's here,
and so those folks -- any way that we can help. And I know
it's a horrible problem; Bandera County is really, really
struggling with theirs. But -- and it's an excellent --
excellent place. It is the place, in my opinion, to -- to
get money. And I don't think that they're -- they're talking
about an increase on state fees, and no increase or any new
moneys coming out of county coffers. It's just raking off a
s-z~-os
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
little bit that's already collected, and the perfect place to
do it, so I'm in favor. If somebody's going to make a
~ motion, I'm certainly going to vote for this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion to pass the
resolution, but I have a couple of possible modifications.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion in favor of the
resolution that's been tendered. Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a second. Question or
discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A question I had -- and I guess
I read it a little bit differently than Commissioner Baldwin.
I thought it was a new $2 fee, or a new fee on top of the
current license, and I don't have any problem with that.
Either way, doesn't make any difference to me. But my real
question is, it says a portion of annual license fees. Are
they talking about all Parks and Wildlife fees? Or hunting
license fees? Because --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's in his cover letter;
he said hunting.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what I anticipated to be
hunting, because Parks and Wildlife issues hundreds of
licenses for all kinds of purposes, and I don't -- you know,
and I think we ought to be more specific, if it's hunting
licenses or all fees.
5-27-08
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree, it needs to be
specific what the fee's going to come from.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In his cover letter, in the
second paragraph, he talks about $2 on every hunting license
sold in the state of Texas.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. So -- well, with that
change, I would say a -- you know, utilizing a portion of the
annual hunting license -- hunting and fishing license?
Actually, just hunting. I think hunting is really more
targeted for this. And I think that the -- I don't know. As
an idea, if you have this going in some big general fund,
maybe it should come back to the counties where the -- or it
needs to be targeted where the funding goes back to the
predator control services that counties already provide.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In your mind, does this tie
into the trapper -- trapper --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, very much, because we pay
that salary.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it's to offset -- I look at
this as to offset that cost, or -- and allow -- and/or allow
counties to get a little, you know, more breathing room so
they can, you know, hire an additional --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This could make a -- could
make a big difference in the amount of money that they have
5-27-08
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
to spend on predator control, because right now the funds are
pretty limited.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Commissioner Baldwin said
ranching, but this is really -- this goes way beyond just
ranching people. This goes to golf courses that hogs root
up, you know, --
JUDGE TINLEY: Domestic pets.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- domestic pets, coyotes
coming in. It's a problem. It really affects almost
everyone in the hill country counties, certainly Kerr County,
and probably all surrounding counties.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure. You're talking about
modifying the first resolved to be funds from annual hunting
and fishing license renewal fees?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that what you're talking
about?
JUDGE TINLEY: Hunting and fishing, or hunting?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hunting.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hunting?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And it'll also go up under
the -- the second line of the resolution, annual hunting
license fees.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
5-27-08
20
1
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's a good idea.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion? All
in favor of the motion to approve the resolution as amended
here, 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: The caption, Judge, should
also say hunting.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, in the bold type up top.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 3, if we might.
Consider, discuss, take appropriate action to solicit
Requests for Proposals and/or Requests for Qualifications to
provide medical services to inmates at Kerr County Jail. I
put this on the agenda at the request of the Sheriff, who had
a proposal made to him from a private contractor to provide
those services as a private contractor. Initially, I would
note that the County Attorney, relative to Request for
Proposal or Request for Qualifications, has indicated that
inasmuch as that is a professional service, in the event the
-- the Court so chooses, that is exempted under the
provisions of Section 262.024 of the Local Government Code,
if the Court decides to permit that exemption, and thereby
5-27-08
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
take it out of the ordinary bidding process, because it is
professional services. Sheriff, I'll turn it over to you at
exorbitant medical issues and costs at the -- at the jail.
About that same time, shortly after that, I also got notice
of a company -- corporation that does nothing but medical
services for small and medium-sized jails. They currently
operate in 11 states, not Texas. They're -- they have
decided and grown to the point now where they feel like they
can take on Texas. They -- they're based out of Chattanooga,
Tennessee. The CEO of the company did fly down himself and
met with us. I called -- they've got, like I said, 11
states, 131 jails, and they do medical in those jails, and
the average population that ranges anywhere from 25 to 750
inmates or so in each one of those jails. They come in,
provide the nurses, the doctors, everything, and do 24-hour
care.
They do not -- with our population, their proposal
would not be on-site 24 hours a day. They would have about
56 hours a week inside our facility, eight hours a day, seven
days a week, including holidays and weekends, and then two
hours one day a week for the doctor or nurse practitioner
5-27-08
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
they will still indemnify us; we can't indemnify them. That
will come out of their -- their proposal. Their other deal
on the proposal, they gave us an average daily population of
160 inmates. Then after that, it goes up about $1.25 or
$1.30 per day, per inmate, above that average. I asked them
to up the proposal in that average, instead of using 160 --
this last month alone, we've been at 189, and a 192-bed,
that's going to be a whole 'nother issue we're going to hit
real quick. But they'll up it to somewhere around --
probably around 180, 170 to 180 as an average, and then we'll
look at it.
The cost would be right at 160,000 a year. It's
159,600 in this. Now, upping the average will probably
change that a little bit. It's actually 13,300 -- or 13,000
a month -- 13,300 a month. The things that are covered in
that cost would be wages and benefits for nurses, medical
director and mental health practitioner, liability
insurances, medical supplies, over-the-counter medication,
lab tests and procedures, office supplies, forms, folders,
5-27-08
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
all administrative support items, travel, lodging, et cetera,
recruiting costs, educational material, long distance phone
charges, disposal of medical waste, and other on-site
services, anything else they do inside the jail. Now,
another part of this proposal is what they call a cost pool,
which the other services would fall under that cost pool.
The original contract of the 160,000 would cover 30,000 in
the cost pool, and then another 5,000 for the next 10,000,
'cause you pay 50/50 at that. Then after 40,000 out of the
cost pool stuff, Kerr County has to start paying 100 percent
of those costs, which those items would be --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, wait. Wait, you've lot
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. The contract is for
if you have to go see the doctor outside -- an outside
doctor, hospital, emergency room, things like that, all those
expenses -- prescription medications -- come out of what is
called a cost pool. The first 30,000 that is billed in that
cost pool is covered under that original 160,000 contract,
okay? After 30,000, the next 10,000, they pay 50 percent; we
pay 50 percent. All right? So, that's 5,000 up to 40,000.
After 40,000 in outside costs, then we pay 100 percent of
those costs, okay? That's the way that works. Now, all
those cost pool items are prescription medication, dentist
5-27-08
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
24
center. All right?
If I were to cut four authorized positions for
clerk, 'cause I still want to have our own recordkeeping, and
I think I need my EMT there, because they envision
distributing, like, prescription medications twice a day
instead of three and four times a day through their doctor
hours a day, so it still leaves our staff that have to -- to
distribute medication at different times, which is the same
thing I've been doing now. But I'd like to have the EMT be
able to do that, and not put that back on jail staff, which
-- which just adds more to my overburdened jail staff as it
is. That's not what I want to do. I want to have a better
way of covering the county liability, but cutting down some
of our medical costs if we can. That -- those four
positions, with FICA and everything else, according to the
H.R. person, and at a 22-1, which is the LVN starting pay of
Kerr County, would actually end up saving -- or end up
costing 207,619 a year, just for four positions.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 207 --
5-27-08
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: $207,619.84. That's what
our -- just our personnel costs would be for the next year.
This contract would be for 159,600 a year. And I don't have
those costs.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, you lost me a little
bit. You say if you cut four slots -- now, is that four
slots that are in this budget that we have today?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That is four --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or is this something that
you're going to propose that you want four more slots for
next year?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes and no.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One of those.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is -- I have two slots
that I've had for years, all right? This Court, about a
month ago, gave me three more slots.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: To be paid for out of my
current budget, because of salaries, different openings and
that, and we can do that. Those three slots would, of
course, next year be added into the -- to the actual cost of
the budget. That's why I say yes and no, all right? But
5-27-08
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
even though I think we can pay for it this year -- I know we
can, 'cause we had some openings, whether they be deputy or
jailers. But -- so, I've -- I've got five positions for
medical, and I'm -- I'm wanting to take that down to one
position, okay? I'll keep one medical position just for
these off-time and emergency first aid, plus this is one of
the instructors that's going to be teaching the rest of the
County employees on first aid and -- and the defibrillator
and all. That helps us.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We're going to net one -- one
less personnel in the new budget; is that correct?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, it would be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Go from 207 to 160.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, but that -- actually,
we've approved three more slots --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- just the other day, and he
has five slots. He says he wants to get rid of four, the way
I understood it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, three of them --
three of them are not yet funded in the new budget.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Exactly. So -- they're not
going to be, so we're actually going to get a minus one
5-27-08
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
person in his future budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But adding 160,000 for this.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We lose personnel and add
contract services.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Add contract services
instead. Plus, is there going to be some -- some medication
savings and things that they think they can -- the cost will
be less?
I SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: According to their CEO, who
flew up here, and talking to them, their estimate on a jail
our size, running the number of inmates we normally run, we
probably should expect to have 30 to -- to 35 inmates on
prescription medication, okay? Currently, we have 68. They
also expect our -- our doctor visits or out of -- you know,
out of the facility visits to get cut way back. This year --
last year, my medical expenses, okay, not -- not salaries,
except for our contract doctor that comes in once a week, but
all our other expenses, medical-wise, was -- at the -- at the
end of April last year, was 74,000. At the end of April this
year, was 110,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's this going to do to the
doctor that comes in once a week now?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: He won't be there any more.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, is that -- is that included
5-27-08
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in that four reduction? Or is that --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. It -- no, it's -- that
-- he's billing us 600 a week.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that's --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Coming in. That is not
included in my cost reduction, but it would be a reduction.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So that's 30,000, roughly,
that you'll eliminate.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You say you want to keep one
person that's a clerk-type person, I think.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I want to keep one clerk who's
coming out of another line item. That one's not even part of
the medical, but she is my medical clerk, okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you said you wanted to
keep that person because of the off time.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, not the clerk. Keep my
EMT, the one medical person, because of the different times
and the different --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you're going to keep a
clerk and -- and a medical person, so that's two persons.
', Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The clerk comes out of a
separate line item.
5-27-08
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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- but my point in all of
this is, off time -- tell me again about -- are there times
when this company's not going to be here?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. Now, tell me
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What they're staffing and what
they're proposing is, they're proposing that the medical
director, the -- or the physician, two hours a week on, like,
Mondays, somewhere around there, and on call all the time.
They're proposing their LVN or RN or nurse practitioner, 40
hours a week, and then the other one, another 16 hours a week
to cover the weekends and the holidays. So, they're
proposing a total of 56, 58 hours a week of somebody in the
facility, but on call 24 hours.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And these people -- those
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Company will contract with the
local doctor, and they hire their own nurses, and that -- I
did try and do some background checks. They've got 131 jails
listed right now; Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Virginia, all up through that portion. I called
about 20 of those. I have not had a bad reference yet, not
5-27-08
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
from their own employees who work for that company up there,
or the jails and jail administrators and sheriffs that --
that have the contract with them. They don't have any
problems with them. The other thing, I did call the Texas
Commission on Jail Standards. They had not heard of them
much, because they haven't moved into Texas yet. But this
company is accredited through the National Commission on
Corrections Health Care, and the Texas Jail Commission said
if they are accredited through that organization, they
probably -- they should even have higher standards than what
the Texas Jail Commission requires.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can't believe they'd say
something like that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, believe it or not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff, is this something
that you want to do now, or for next budget year?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I'd like to see if we
can get started as soon as possible. My problem is, I'm --
I've got one of the three positions that I could hire. I've
had that person -- we'd offered a job and this came up; I had
them hold off, but I could get that one. And I'm having a
harder time -- and I don't -- our current -- I think our
current medical is getting totally out of control. I think
we've had some staff, contracted or otherwise, that have been
there -- that have been there 10, 15 years, and are at the
5-27-08
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
point of, "Okay, this is what we give you." You know, "What
do you need today? Okay." Instead of really controlling
medical. And I think we're getting out of control, which is
costing more and more. Instead of going ahead and hiring
those three new ones that you gave me and all that, and then
having to go through an attrition period and trying to cut it
back down, I think this is an opportune time to contract with
this. Because we are paying it at the 13 -- 13,300 or just a
little bit above per month, and we -- we can do it easier at
this moment with where we are than we can with anything else.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this firm licensed to do
business in Texas?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This firm is licensed to do
business across the U.S. They first started out -- 'cause
they use doctors and nurses licensed here, okay? They first
started out doing prisons, and still do a lot of prisons, and
their CEO and that -- and then they went and decided that,
really, the better need -- and I don't know why anybody would
want to get into inmate medical care, but they -- they felt
the bigger need was in smaller to mid-size county jails. And
I agree with them; there's a strong need in it. But --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sheriff, you mentioned that
your medical expenses over the last two years have ranged
from 74,000 to 110,000, and that the doctor -- the doctor
contract equates to about 31.2 -- 31,000. Is that 31,000
5-27-08
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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The 31,000 is part of the
medical expense in the budget.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: From the 74 to 110.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What is not part of that 74 to
110 is the medical personnel salary at the jail. It isn't
that contracted doctor, it is not any of our nurses or
anything else. That's on top of all that. So, the -- if I
hired one -- if I kept the four positions at 207,000, that --
that would be on top -- over all medical, that's on top of
that 110.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sheriff, the -- you mentioned
this 58 hours a week, you'll have someone in the jail that
are on call 24 hours a day. How -- how is that -- is that
included? Is that overtime? Say, you know, someone ends up
being there, you know 20 hours a day.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's their employee, not
ours. We don't have anything to do with that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it's going to be -- it's
unlimited overtime or however they want to handle it, up to a
hundred and -- I mean, is it within that $160,000?
5-27-08
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No -- we don't pay any more,
okay?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's included in that?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We pay 160,000 no matter what.
But their estimates on what they're proposing is going to be
that 58 hours a week that they're there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But if they're having
to come in on a lot of overtime, they're not going to cut
back during the day? Or does it make any difference?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They could, but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they're still going to have
to be on call so someone's there.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
I
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How would you budget for
~i
the excess -- the potential of excess over the 160,000?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would still keep my
medical -- some of my medical budget, just like we do now
each year, in estimating what our medical cost's going to be.
This year it's dropped a lot. If -- if you look at a lot --
part of it, since they're now using the -- and paying the
indigent care part, we've been billed -- okay, now, not this.
We've been billed in medical bills over 100,000 so far this
year. The County has paid, because they're paying the
indigent care through the Auditor and that, about 42,000,
okay? So, the hospital and doctors have billed us, so we
5-27-08
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
would still continue that part of it. But until you get
above the 30,000 and we start paying 50/50, we don't even get
the bills. They take care of all that, and they bill it
through the -- through that same company.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Will they go after the indigent
health care themselves?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or do that filing?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They do all that.
JUDGE TINLEY: What about reimbursements?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: As far as --
JUDGE TINLEY: Any reimbursements received through
the inmates, their commissary funds, or maybe coverage that
they have available.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They recommend strongly that
we still continue to charge inmates through the commissary
account for doctor visits, for -- for medical or for anything
that -- you know, any expenses we have, unless they're an
indigent inmate and you can't, but otherwise, that we do.
That's -- that's our reimbursement. They don't get that.
They do their own. They don't -- they don't see any of that.
That's just ours. What costs us is their contract.
JUDGE TINLEY: On the 100,000 that's been billed, I
believe you said 30 or 40 of which had been actually paid by
the County?
5-27-08
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is the entire excess, the difference
there, the 60,000 or 70,000, whichever it may be, was all of
that paid through our Indigent Health Care program?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, I don't think the excess
was paid at all. The -- the County, for inmate health care,
as far as medical bills and that, we've been billed by the
hospital or private doctor's offices a little over 100,000.
The County has paid -- because under that deal, they consider
all inmates indigent, okay? The County has paid only 42,000
of that hundred and some thousand.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That's the indigent health
care --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- discount, in essence?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: The rate schedule we pay under.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what we're paying
under. And then -- but, of course, some of that does not
cover very many of the prescription meds and things like that
that we're paying. Now, the other -- a lot of other costs
that's coming out of our medical budget, you know, is
supplies, is the employees, is the benefits, is a lot of the
prescriptions, a lot of over-the-counter meds, all that kind
of stuff, which we won't have over-the-counter meds; they
5-27-08
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
36
in-house, you're going to see a lot of change in being able
to run the jail on fewer staff. Because what we're having to
do now that is killing us is taking five to six inmates a day
to outside doctor's appointments, some of them being set up
in San Antonio, some of them being set up in -- and one
Friday going to Leon Springs, okay. And some of this is done
by staff. You're going to cut down -- if you -- if you cut
down on -- from 68, 70 inmates on prescription meds that
you're having to pass out four times a day, down to 30
inmates on prescription meds that you're passing out two to
three times a day, depending on the medication, but they
don't give the -- a lot of the medications just to help them
sleep at night and things that have gotten totally out of
control, I think, in the current situation. To give
medically necessary ones, but not -- not a lot of this other.
And the over-the-counter, I think you're going to save a lot
I
of time on the rest of the staff -- you know, our staff being
able to do their duties day to day. And that's where -- when
I came to y'all asking for three more people if something
5-27-08
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
drastically didn't change, yeah, we had to have -- and we're
at the point of having to have round-the-clock care, unless
something can drastically change. And if this company's been
doing this and they have the -- the insurance capabilities
and underwriters to do it, and they can get it back to
emergency medical care, I think everybody's better off.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty?
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Go ahead.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're seeking a one-year contract.
Is that what we're looking at here?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Seeking a one-year contract.
If we renew it, it's a 3 percent increase, is what they
estimate each year in the contract.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that plugged in? An increase not
to exceed 3 percent? Or --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What the --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- do you recall?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You get billed per month.
Future year's pricing -- second and third years, if Kerr
County elects to contract with Southern Health Partners, we
will -- we are willing to set fixed price increases for the
second and third year in advance for each of these years. We
offer to set our price increase at a fixed 3 percent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The agenda item is styled as
5-27-08
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
take action to solicit Request for Proposal or Request for
Qualifications. So, I mean, to me, I'm in favor of, you
know, certainly doing that, and probably in favor of doing
the whole thing. So, I'll make a motion that we authorize
the Sheriff to solicit Requests for Qualifications to provide
medical services to inmates in Kerr County Jail, and this is
exempt from the --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bidding.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- bidding statute, Section
262.024.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll second it. I have one
more question of the Sheriff.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Question
or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One last question, Sheriff.
In terms of your desire to get this started as quickly as
possible, if it is started as soon as can be in the current
budget year, what is the current budget year impact?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, the current budget year
impact would be less than me hiring the other three people
that I have -- you know, that would come out of my current
budget year. I don't see, at 13,000 a -- well, it may be --
if we do four with the -- I'd have to go back and see. If
you're talking four employees at 207,000, okay, is -- is what
we could handle totally, then that -- that's a full year.
5-27-08
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'd just have to go back and refigure whether we're going to
come out even, or whether I'm going to have to pay a little
bit more.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Four months, third of a
year.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, 207,000 divided by four.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 60 -- 50,000 plus.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And then, depending on if your
-- if your prescription bills go down and your hospital bills
go down during that same time, I think you're just going to
be close as to whether or not we would.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If those bills don't go
down, I mean, this is -- this is ridiculous to have this
conversation, if those things don't --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, it is, but it isn't
also.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: On the liability. The one
thing our --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A lot of trouble bringing in
an outside company. Listen, the CFO guy that flew in here to
visit with you, --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: CEO.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- did he fly commercially
or privately?
5-27-08
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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I didn't ask him.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to know.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I did do one other thing.
Charles Frigerio, who represents me and this county on any of
our lawsuits, one thing he has been trying to get us to do
for quite a while is get a contract with our physician, and
our physician has never come up with one or agreed to sign a
contract currently, because he says you need that under your
-- your liability issues. In visiting with him, he is also
doing some research -- I talked to him last week, and he's
pulling up, seeing what else he can find out. In doing that,
and visiting with Rex, one of the biggest savings that we
could also come up with is the liability under medical care.
It's all under their insurance liability.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it may need some
tweaking down the road, but I think, you know, I like
contracting this service out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do too, basically.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's -- I like the liability
side of it. I like having it -- you know, probably they're
going to run it pretty tight, because it's their dollars, and
the less they spend on some of this stuff, the better, and I
think that's better for the taxpayers in general.
I, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion
5-27-08
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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. Thank you,
Sheriff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: We had a 9:30 item that we ran over
during the course of that discussion, and I will call that
item. Item 4, to open bids for 4,400 square feet of concrete
for the storage area at the Kerr County Fairgrounds and take
appropriate action to award bid and authorize construction.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You got a fancy letter
opener.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know. Must be afraid I was
going to start cutting my hand off with my dull pocketknife.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a bid from Freed and
Barker Concrete. Wait a minute. I think this is on the --
this is on the sidewalk. This one is -- hold that one for
the moment. Freed and Barker on the -- on the Ag Barn
foundation project, total job price, 15,793.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sixteen?
JUDGE TINLEY: 15,793. Yeah, 16, roughly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This one has both of them, it
5-27-08
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
appears, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: And another proposal from Montgomery
j Construction, with one bid submitted for all three of the --
or both of the concrete items. On the 4,400 square feet of
concrete, 16,370. Next bid is from Thomas Mall Concrete,
25,800. We have a bid from Jimmy Bitner, d/b/a Bitner
Supply. I'm having difficulty finding where the bid price is
included on this particular -- yes, here it is, on the very
front. I'm sorry, the very top. 22,386.78, materials and
labor. Bid from Schwarz Construction Company, 22,525.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: On that one. Move we accept
all bids and refer them to Maintenance for recommendation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maintenance Director.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded 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.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll move
to Item 5, which is a 9:40 timed item. We ran over that one
too. Open bids for 648 square feet of concrete sidewalk at
5-27-08
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
the Kerr County Courthouse take appropriate action to award
bid and authorize construction. We have, in one of the bids,
Montgomery Construction, on the removal and replacement of
that sidewalk, $6,485.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That second number gets added
to that.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- there was an add-on. The
Montgomery Construction granite and curb, if needed, 600
square feet, 2,850. I would note that the -- that that
Montgomery construction bid was a composite or total for all
the projects, $29,145, but which did not include granite and
curbs. The other bid on the sidewalk, another bid is Freed
and Barker. Total price, $8,940. Another bid, Thomas Mall
Concrete, $8,850. Another bid, Schwarz Construction,
$14,310.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept all bids and
refer them to the Maintenance Director for recommendation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
i COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded 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.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
5-27-08
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: When are you coming back,
Mr. Tim?
JUDGE TINLEY: We also have a 9:50 timed item, Item
Number 6, which we ran by, which I will now call. Open bids
for one 6-ton air conditioning unit and four 8 1/2-ton air
conditioning units, take appropriate action to award bid in
whole or in part as applicable. First bid that we have is
from Trademark. The Option 1 appears to be based on a 10
SEER unit, R-22. For three 8 1/2-ton rooftop units and two
6-ton package units, $31,500. Option 2 is a 13 SEER Puron
unit. Three 8 1/2-ton package units on rooftop, and two
6-ton A/C package units, total is $53,750. Next one is from
Hardin Heating and Cooling. Two Carrier 6-ton units and
three Carrier 8 1/2-ton package units, the total price,
$26, 621.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that the same amount --
the same number of units as the other one?
I COMMISSIONER OEHLER: In Option I.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Different configuration.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All three numbers are a little
bit -- all three proposals are a little bit different.
But -- you know, so that's it, just those two.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, just those two.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept all air
5-27-08
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
conditioning bids and refer to the Maintenance Director for
recommendation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded 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.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a general comment. You
might want to visit with Rex on that one bid that came in all
combined to see if that's good, on the -- on the concrete
ones that all came in as one bid, whether they can be
separated or not. I don't know if he violated our bid
request or not.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything further on that
item? We'll now go to a 10 o'clock timed item, to consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to open and award bid
for a C-7500 truck equipped with an aerial bucket and chip
box.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The old chip box.
~ JUDGE TINLEY: First bid that I have is Ufleet,
$69,900. The next one -- this is all one? -- is from Terex
Utilities Incorporated, $65,000 even.
5-27-08
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we refer bids to the
Road and Bridge Supervisor and wait on recommendation.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I should have said
administrator. I think I said supervisor. Administrator.
MR. ODOM: What's in a name?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You'd think after all these
years, he'd probably remember.
JUDGE TINLEY: 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. I have
another 10 o'clock timed item. At this time, I will recess
the Commissioners Court meeting, and I will convene a public
hearing for the revision of plat, Ingram Hills, Lot 25, as
set forth in volume 3, Page 149 of Plat Records, and located
in Precinct 4.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed
at 10:04 a.m., and a public hearing was held in
open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public
5-27-08
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
that wishes to be heard with regard to the revision of the
plat for Ingram Hills, Lot 25, as set forth in Volume 3, Page
149, Plat Records?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Seeing no one seeking to be
recognized, I will close the public hearing for the revision
of plat for Ingram Hills, Lot 25, as set forth in Volume 3,
Page 149, Plat Records, and at this time I will convene a
public hearing for revision of plat for Lots 23 and 24W in
The Reserve of Falling Water, as set forth in Volume 7, Page
215 of the Plat Records, and located in Precinct 3.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:05 a.m.,
and a second public hearing was held in open court,
as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public
that wishes to be heard with regard to the revision of plat
for Lots 23 and 24W in The Reserve of Falling Water, as set
forth in Volume 7, Page 215, Plat Records?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Seeing no one seeking to be
recognized, I will close that public hearing.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:05 a.m.,
and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was
reopened.)
25 ~ JUDGE TINLEY: And we'll go to Item 7 on the
5-27-08
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
agenda, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
name a private road per 911 guidelines.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. This is an unnamed road
located off Highway 27 near Dove Valley. It meets 911
guidelines, and the homeowners want it to be named Target
Hill Road.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item 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. We'll now
go to Item 8, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to approve the final plat of Headwaters Ranch, Phase
3, located in Precinct 4.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The average lot size is 20
acres, so no overall drainage plan is required. Street
profiles, ditches, and cross-drainage plans were required and
completed. Our consulting engineer, Wayne Wells, has
reviewed the plan and given verbal approval. Headwaters
Ranch, Phase 3 will have a local road to be
5-27-08
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
County-maintained, and today we are requesting the final
approval of Phase 3 of Headwaters Ranch. And if there are
any questions, Sam Poorman's here to answer any questions you
might have.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I see the road notation.
Are these to be County-maintained roads? It just says
they're dedicated.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, all three phases. We had two
phases. Phase 1 and 2 we've already done. Phase 3 is the
last portion which we had them redo.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. 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. We'll move
to Item 12; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
approve actuarial services for GASB 45 with Gabriel Roeder
Smith and Company, and the interlocal agreement with the
North Central Texas Council of Governments. Commissioners
5-27-08
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
Court approved the Auditor's Office preparing and requesting
an RFP for those actuary services on February the 11th, 2008.
Ms. Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: These services are for our post and
retirement benefits, the health care benefits that we now
provide to our retirees. We are required, under the law,
under the AICPA rules, to have this number in our financial
statements in 2009, and in order to do that, we have to get
the study prepared, and it takes about six to nine months to
have the study done. So, this particular company is working
through the North Central Texas Council of Governments. They
have been approved through that bid process, and it's already
taken place. There are many other counties using this same
service, as well as several cities. We have to book this
liability on our financial statements, and this is how we get
it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is this a new requirement, or
something that we just --
MS. HARGIS: No, it's not a new requirement. It --
actually, we are the -- it's being phased in in three phases,
just like GASB 34 was. GASB 34 started with the large
counties. Then the second was the mid-size, and then small.
We fall under the small category, and we are required to have
this ready for our financial statements for the next audit,
actually, when they prepare it.
5-27-08
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The purpose of this is to
establish our contingent liability; is that correct?
MS. HARGIS: This establishes our actuarial
liability for -- and then we decide how we're going to put it
on our financial statements. There are two ways of doing it,
and they'll make that recommendation at that time. You can
prefund, which I personally wouldn't recommend, or you do it
on a cash basis, which is what we're doing now. We currently
have only 12 retirees on this program, but we have the
possibility of all 300 employees retiring and being on this
service at some time. This is the controversial GASB 45 that
the State decided not to put on their financials, and put
into a note. But the State uses a different type of
financial statement presentation, and all the other counties
and the cities in the state of Texas are going with this
rather than using the state, because this could affect our
bond rating if we don't have this in our financials. At this
time, I cannot tell you whether it's a large number or small
number. Usually it comes out to be a very large number.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The liability?
MS. HARGIS: The liability. But, again, it's a
liability that is incurred on an annual basis. It is a
liability that, at some point in time, the County can decide
that they no longer offer that, 'cause we don't have a
contract for that. However, right now you do offer it, and
5-27-08
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
so, therefore, we are required to report it under GASB 45.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the cost is estimated to be
4, 680?
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that -- I mean, how --
MS. HARGIS: That's fairly reasonable. If you go
out on your own, what I'm seeing is 10 to 20 to 30,000.
These are -- it requires a lot of work because of the
actuarial studies involved in it. They've gotten better at
it. Fortunately for us, we are the -- you know, coming in on
the third year, so we've kind of learned from the big cities
and the counties. The cities were actually hit first, 'cause
they were larger than some of the counties. But this is --
you know, this is a very controversial one. That is the one
that's probably going to get GASB closed down, but -- I hope,
in the future. GFOA, which is the Government Finance
Officers Association, is trying to get GASB to be dismantled
and the rules and regulations to go back under what is FASB,
which has been in existence since the 1800's, which is the --
the Financial Accounting Standards Board that's set the
standards for accounting standards for years. GASB's gotten
a little out of hand. Their original proposal was that they
would put together financial statements and stop with 34, and
there are now 56 to 57 statements out there. Some of them
just involve internal control. The new ones, some of them
5-27-08
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
involve fraud, and right now they haven't -- the finance
offices have not won that battle. So, you may see that in
the next couple of years.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This says an additional fee of
1,560 will be added if claims experience is required. When
will they determine that?
MS. HARGIS: We will determine that. I talked to
him about that. If we decide that the -- what he gives us is
the number we want to go with, and that's what we'll do. If
we decide to expand it -- in other words, we want to expand
our actuarial study to include different classes of people,
we can do that, but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't want to do that.
MS. HARGIS: I don't recommend that. I know I
wouldn't recommend that. I think we just get the study right
now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Jeannie, the dollar amount
you quoted as the fee, is that -- does that include the
option study that he talks about here? Telling us what our
options are for mitigating the OPEB liability, and the cost
of that study is 780. Is that included in the amount that
you're talking about?
MS. HARGIS: No, I don't believe that it is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that something we want
5-27-08
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
to do?
MS. HARGIS: We would like to have the options.
Again, I would rather you just approve the 4,680. Let's see
what it is, and then, if I think -- if we decide we want the
options, we can let them come back with that. I'd -- I think
it's not going to be that bad a number. I may be wrong.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Also, the options are
something you might know; is that correct?
MS. HARGIS: Yes. The options are whether you go
cash or you do the other, and I think our financial adviser
and I, and our -- and your external auditor, we can decide
those options without having them do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: These are budgeted funds
somewhere?
MS. HARGIS: I'm going to have to find them in
mine, I'm sure. 'Cause the auditor that we used -- we
changed used our full budget, so we're going to have to find
this somewhere else.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have any funds in
Professional Services?
MS. HARGIS: Yes, we do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the likely spot right
now.
MS. HARGIS: They probably won't bill us all of it
5-27-08
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
55
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the agenda
item to -- to require the actuarial services for GASB 45 with
Gabriel Roeder Smith and Company.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does that include the interlocal
agreement with North Central Texas Council of Governments
which would include that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does, and the County
Judge to sign same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And does it include the funds
to come from Professional Services?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does. Thank you for
reminding me. Anything else we need to add?
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second. Any
question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just wonder if the County
Attorney has signed off on this document.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're reading my mind,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, I know. You're good at that.
Fortunately, I'm not very good at reading yours.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Have you gotten an answer for
5-27-08
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
that?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I'm waiting for him to
jump up and down.
MR. EMERSON: Not all of it, no.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's an agreement with a
private company.
MR. EMERSON: How about approval subject to my
review?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what the motion implies.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's exactly what I said.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion
on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move
to Item 13; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
proposed concept for revision of plat for Live Springs Ranch.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, Live Springs is out in
Precinct 4 off of Henderson Branch Road. I met with
Mr. Voelkel. I think Jonathan was with us one time. We
talked about what they would like to do would be a -- be a
revised -- revision of plat. The developer has spent lots
and lots of money in there, and would like to divide some of
5-27-08
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
the lots up into smaller pieces. And that's basically it.
This would be a -- it would have a little bit of problem.
They had their lots a little too big to start with, I
believe, and they were not able to sell very many of them and
thought that maybe if they did a revised plat -- and, of
course, most of this property is in Gillespie County.
There's only a very small portion of it in Kerr County. And
part of the -- part of the revision process is to get this
many lots, it could mandate that you widen the road. Their
proposal is to widen the right-of-way that would accommodate
a wider road at some point in time, whenever their traffic
count would exceed 800 cars a day, but they would have a wide
enough right-of-way to have a collector road instead of a
local road. So, that can be done at the proper time,
whenever the traffic count gets there. So, Mr. Voelkel, did
I miss anything?
COMMISSIONER I,ETZ: I mean, I'll comment on that
last point. To me -- and probably -- I guess it requires a
waiver on the next item. The -- the intent was -- you know,
I think the developer and the County dealt in good faith
originally when we put these in as local; it met the
qualification. It was never anticipated at that point to do
what they are doing now, and to make them go to local roads
right now as our rules require would mean just tearing out a
brand-new road and rebuilding it, and that just doesn't make
5-27-08
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
sense. The -- our rules have multiple criteria for road
construction, and one of them is vehicle count, average daily
vehicle count. We're keeping that at 800, so -- and we're
basing it -- kind of what Bruce and I talked about, which
made sense to us, anyway, was to approve a waiver at this
point to upgrade the road, but make it a requirement as soon
as the average traffic count gets to 800, which is what our
current rules say triggers it to get to a collector road.
So, we're kind of, you know, within doing what our rules say,
but modifying it slightly because of the situation.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And a lot of these homes they
feel like that are going to be built there, people are going
to buy those tracts, a lot of them are going to be second
homes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And so they're not going to
have traffic to the -- to the level, you know, that you would
have if people were living there, you know, every day of the
year. But that also will tie back to traffic count, that the
traffic count will mandate at such time that those will have
to be wider to meet the standards.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the next agenda item. Right
now we're dealing with the concept plan of the subdivision
itself as it pertains to Kerr County and smaller lot sizes, I
believe, is basically what the approach is. Is that not --
5-27-08
59
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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, the lot sizes are in
excess of 5-plus acres, and I don't see any problem with --
with the revision of plat as far as lot size goes.
I COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just one quick question.
How do you get into this subdivision? Off of I-10, the
access road, or how do you get in there?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Henderson Branch.
MR. VOELKEL: I think it's highlighted in pink,
I Bill .
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Huh?
MR. VOELKEL: The area highlighted in pink. The
entrance road's off of Henderson Branch Road.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Off Highway 27.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Comes off of Highway 27?
MR. VOELKEL: Right, comes off of Highway 27 at
Lazy Hills Guest Ranch Road and Henderson Branch Road.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Which our access to this is
much worse than the road that exists in that subdivision.
They spent a lot of money in there and did a real fine job on
their roads, and so I have no problem at all with the concept
of revising them down to smaller lots, 'cause they're still
way in excess of minimum.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any formal action of the Court
required? Other than --
5-27-08
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think this was just a
concept.
MR. VOELKEL: We just wanted to get it before
i
~I everybody, let everybody know what we were doing, make sure
everybody felt comfortable with the one concept that we
wanted to do, because the next step is going to be to get on
the agenda to do a public hearing and revision of plat, final
revision. So, it's another preliminary stage, really, in the
revision of plat process. So, I --
JUDGE TINLEY: So you're not seeking any formal
action by the Court, other than to just make us aware of what
the proposed revision is?
MR. VOELKEL: And if there's any, you know,
feedback from y'all, you know, we want to hear it. You know,
we were also going to -- Les Harvey is here; he's the
engineer. He's going to take care of doing any drainage
structures and con -- you know, considerations for all the --
you know, the upgrades to the lot size.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there any thought of trying
to get access off I-10 in Gillespie County?
MR. VOELKEL: I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's next to impossible, I
can tell you that up front. It's almost cost-prohibitive,
number one, and secondly, it's almost impossible.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is there an access road
5-27-08
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I know a man that owned the
300 acres that's now part of the subdivision that fronts on
I-10, that was landlocked when I-10 came through, and it was
almost impossible to ever make that happen. I'm sure with
enough money -- I imagine if you had two or three million
dollars or more, may take more than that, you might could get
access to it. But it's --
MR. VOELKEL: That never has been an option.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- slim or none. This is the
only way in and out of there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other comments? Questions?
Thank you, sir.
MR. VOELKEL: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me call Item 14; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action for a variance to
postpone construction improvements to Chisolm Trail and
portions of Sedalia Trail in Live Springs Ranch until such
time as the average daily traffic count on such roadway
exceeds 800 vehicles per day, and establish appropriate
conditions for such variance. Now we're to the action item,
I think.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: All right. I would like to
-- to move in favor of the agenda item, with one addition,
and that is that the traffic counts will be done on an annual
5-27-08
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
basis and turned into Road and Bridge, so that we don't
forget to make that -- that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who does it?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would say the develop --
the homeowners' association will do it, or -- and/or the
developer. That's my motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard? Does that -- are you
happy with that?
MR. ODOM: I'd be happy with that, to have some
accountability.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're going to have
somebody count the cars on an annual basis and turn it in to
Leonard? My only hangup with that is -- I mean, I kind of
like the idea, but my only hangup with it is, I'd like to
specifically know who's going to count those cars, and I'd
like to know when they're going to turn those numbers in.
I'd like for them to -- a specific time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are these county roads?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No.
MR. VOELKEL: They're private roads.
JUDGE TINLEY: Right.
5-27-08
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
also.
I well .
MR. VOELKEL: And also private in Gillespie County
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What?
MR. VOELKEL: Private roads in Gillespie County as
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What we do to answer that
question a little bit, couldn't we -- at the end of Henderson
Branch, couldn't we put the -- I mean, I'd rather have
Leonard do it, even though it's more work for him than -- I
mean, to keep track of it. I don't know how much work it is
to do traffic counts.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We could put it at the
entrance going into there and get it off the main road. It
wouldn't be fair to count all the cars going into the other
place down there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure it would.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's not --
MR. VOELKEL: We're not upgrading their roads.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand this new
ministry, they're going to have lots of cars. To Lazy Hills,
there's going to be lots of traffic in and out of there. Is
that what you're talking about?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I was talking about past
Lazy Hills, at the entrance to the subdivision.
5-27-08
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Actually, I really like the
idea of Leonard doing it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I do too.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I'll amend the motion
to state that the traffic count will be done by the County at
the entrance of the -- Henderson Branch on an annual basis.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll third that motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Before --
JUDGE TINLEY: Live Springs.
MR. VOELKEL: Live Springs.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Live Springs.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would -- I think -- I mean,
going back a little bit, I don't see any reason to start
doing those until there's some development out there. I
i mean --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, I mean, I would
rather leave it at the discretion of Road and Bridge to do
the traffic counts when they want to do it, so we don't go
out and do unnecessary work that doesn't really serve a
purpose. Leonard's going to have a pretty good idea what the
traffic's doing on that road. They can do that, and I think
it also should say that within 24 months of being notified by
5-27-08
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Kerr County, the road shall be upgraded, or something -- or
some period. I think it's --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You want to back up and redo
this whole thing?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think it's -- you know,
I think traffic counts, that was added in whenever -- after
we finished talking. That was a good idea. We also ought to
add when they have to upgrade. They "shall" means they have
to, or we can take some action to force them.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is going to be another
one of those long-winded motions, I can tell.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're good at it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. I move that we --
JUDGE TINLEY: You want to restate your motion?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I want to restate my motion.
I move that we grant a variance from road specifications to
widen the road at this point, based on the revised plat, and
that a traffic count be done by Kerr County at the entrance
of the subdivision annually, whenever they deem necessary,
and that within two years of the traffic count reaching 800,
the road will be upgraded. Is that close?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pretty good.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Perfect.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We have a motion and
5-27-08
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Why don't we go ahead and
take about a 15-minute recess now, and we'll come back and
finish up.
(Recess taken from 10:27 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if
we might. We were in mid-morning recess. We'll take up Item
16; consider, discuss, take appropriate action on
negotiations with the City of Kerrville on the airport and/or
other matters concerning airport and other joint projects.
Which one you of you guys wants to launch this balloon?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, Commissioner Letz
will launch it and I'll fill in.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we -- the committee met,
Councilmen Gross and Hamilton, Commissioner Williams and
myself, last week, and I think we have a tentative agreement
verbally between the four of us. We haven't been to Council
5-27-08
67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
or Commissioners Court over the Airport Board yet, but the --
the basic agreement is -- is that the Airport Manager will
report to the Airport Board. That's a new part that we
talked about last time, and the other new part is that during
the next five years, the County will take over 100 percent
funding for operations at the airport, and with the idea
being that it will be 50/50 the first year, then 60/40,
70/30, down to the point five years from now when the County
will be 100 percent responsible for the funding. Which we
had that on the table once before; City Council was the one
that pulled that back, so I'm not sure where it'll go this
time, what's changed there, but that's kind of where we are.
I think everything else -- and I think -- Commissioner
Williams, I believe, met with the County Attorney and has
asked him to meet with the City Attorney and write a contract
or interlocal agreement that will memorialize all this.
It'll be, I think, a lot more detailed contract or agreement
than last time, having got all the information specifically
in that agreement from Chapter 22 and/or the Airport
Authority legislation, HB 961.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Essentially, it will be
operated under Chapter 22 of the Transportation Code and the
interlocal agreement. I believe the Transportation Code
requires that the resolution between the two of us contain
the body of what we're talking about in the resolution, so
5-27-08
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the interlocal agreement would contain all of the things that
how the board is chosen, how the board repopulates itself,
what happens in the event of the funding -- when the budget
has been presented to the City and/or the County, if either
of the two entities have a problem with -- with the amount of
subsidy that would be provided under that budget, there is a
right of refusing to do so, and the funding reverts back to
the previous year. So, all of those things that were
contained in that memorandum, plus what we agreed to in the
second meeting, or in front of the County Attorney, and I
assume in front of the City Attorney as well, for those two
gentlemen to figure out what an interlocal agreement looks
like.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: One thing I really thought
the funding over time, my feeling is that should cover kind
of O & M type items, not capital improvement items.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that was the
intent, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it is too. I just
5-27-08
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
wanted the County Attorney to be aware, because the City's
still going to maintain 50 percent ownership, and I think
they should be responsible as owners of -- of paying their
part of -- 50 percent of capital improvements.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You may recall that in t
first meeting indicated that -- that the Airport Board be
required to submit, in effect, two budgets, an 0 & M and a
capital improvement budget, and -- and to arrive at the
capital improvement budget, they have to do much the same as
what we've done in the past, and that's identify all the
projects and prioritize them, and prioritize them in terms of
budget years. Some of the items -- as I recall, last time I
had anything to do with it, some of the items slipped to
maybe four or five years out, and some of them were more
important and they were included in the first or second year,
and we would anticipate that that would be the same
procedure, and the CIB comes in a separate package from the
0 & M, and that should be contained in there as well. That's
my recollection.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But that's kind of where we
are, and it's just to kind of update the Court. And once
those agreements are -- the City Attorney and County Attorney
have ironed out an agreement that they're comfortable with
that memorializes that, the process shall be disseminated to
5-27-08
70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Airport Board for comments. Not necessarily -- they
don't have a veto, per se, but just to get their input. And
let us -- the four of us then look at it again. Then it will
go to City Council and Commissioners Court for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The other items of joint
interest between the City and the County, we have pretty well
resolved Animal Control, as we had talked to you about that,
talked to the Court about -- that we will take -- assume the
responsibility for Animal Control within the city limits of
city of Kerrville. The library funding, we had set a
number -- was that four? I believe it was four.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He said we can't talk about
I this .
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can't talk about that? Why
not? Joint projects.
MR. EMERSON: It says, "and other matters
concerning airport projects."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was misstated; it's
supposed to be joint projects. (Laughter.) And that was
~ corrected by the Judge when he called the item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Shhh.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: See, if you'd have been
here on time, you'd have heard that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me -- let me see if I'm up to
speed. What you've reported are essentially the second phase
s-2~-os
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of -- of some negotiations to kind of encapsulate this thing.
Number one, that the population of the Airport Board would be
increased to five.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: That the population of the board
would be done by what I call the KPUB model, where the board
itself proposes nominees, and it's up to a maximum of a
three-step process, where the board members two times can be
nonselected, and then the third time there's no -- there's no
nonselection available.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my understanding.
Yours, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the current board would remain
in place for the purpose of accomplishing that task.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they would be asked to
resign, but they can be reappointed. But they will -- they
will come up with the names.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Come up with the names.
First submit their resignation, and indicate when they submit
the names of their willingness to continue to serve if
appointed.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, come up with a slate of
five people, which may include themselves; hopefully will
5-27-08
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
include themselves.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. But under the constitutional
provision, that they would serve until their successors are
qualified. If -- if the -- if the slate of five is not
approved, they would retain the authority to submit a new
slate.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And if necessary, the third slate
under the KPUB model, so that the -- the selection would be
done by the board itself, the current board.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the Airport Manager would then
be employed by and report to the board.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And any other personnel
needed to -- to operate his office.
JUDGE TINLEY: Right. Any of the -- any of the
operations functions, including the personnel to accomplish
those functions, under Chapter 22 of the Transportation Code,
would be spelled out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Transportation Code and
excerpts from 956. There are a lot of provisions of 956
5-27-08
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
which we're sliding over, but we're operating under Chapter
22.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: These provisions.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the -- the more recent addition
to that is the phase-out of city funding on a -- on a --
IO percent annually over a period of five years for 0 & M.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And that's pretty much it in
a nutshell?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Who's going to handle the
disbursements and the payroll?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's up in the air still.
It's -- it could -- you know --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They can either do it
themselves by acquiring a small financial package --
QuickBooks would manage the airport, if we were to get down
to it -- or they can do it through interlocal agreement.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the Airport Manager's
salary and benefits -- not salary -- yeah, all of that tied
up can be through interlocal agreement with the County or the
City, if they -- whatever. But it will be interlocal between
the Airport Board and one of the two governing bodies.
5-27-08
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 LETZ: There are also financial
payroll companies that they can interlocal with that are, you
know, $30, $40 a month generally for small businesses.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm sure that --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It might be somewhat of a
disadvantage for the -- whoever that Airport Manager is to be
able to get benefits, retirement and insurance and stuff like
that, when it would just be basically a single employee.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They can interlocal with the
City or the County for those -- for the benefits.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it would be
advantageous to do one or the other.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Well, I'm just saying,
even the paperwork of writing the checks can be contracted
out. Doesn't have to be --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I'm talking
about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The person would either be --
it'd make more sense for there to be an interlocal from a
benefit standpoint.
JUDGE TINLEY: But the benefit package alone can be
by separate contract.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We already checked with
5-27-08
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
H.R.; we can do it by interlocal with the County, and that
package could be identified, structured, and presented to the
Airport Manager.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that covers it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it's a good -- in my
mind, a good recommendation to go forward with. It's -- it
pretty much creates a truly completely independent airport.
Still has the financial resources of the City and the County
to do things, but it's -- the Airport Board will be set up to
be able to make all decisions related to the airport,
including zoning. We talked about at the last meeting, they
need that zoning, which is now under the City of Kerrville's
P & Z, will be pulled out and come under the Airport Board,
unless they choose to interlocal back with -- I mean, the
Airport Board can choose to interlocal back with the City or
County on a lot of these services, you know, and probably
will. It will be their decision on all matters, though, and
I think it's kind of the best of all worlds. It gets us
independent, quote, authority, and leaves the financial
situation, the strength of the City and County behind the
airport.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Eminent domain is reserved
back to the City and/or the County under state statute. They
5-27-08
76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
can't exercise that on their own, but if they see a need,
they will come back and talk to the City and/or the County,
whoever's appropriate. Judge, this calls for appropriate
action. I'm not sure we want to do any action on this today.
It's really just a report. When we get the interlocal
agreement draft, we'll bring it back to the Court at that
point.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's something that's being worked
on by the County Attorney and the City Attorney now?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other -- anything else to
be offered by any member of the Court with regard to that
item? If not, we'll go to a timed item at 11 o'clock, Item
15, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
accept a gift of artwork from the Kerr County Historical
i
Commission. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Thank you very
much. This is an exciting, exciting moment for us all. My
good friend Joe Luther is the president of the Kerr County
Historical Commission. I think -- president?
MR. LUTHER: Um --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that your title?
MR. LUTHER: Yes. That -- no, I like Chairman.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Chairman.
MR. LUTHER: Thank you.
5-27-08
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Grand Poopah. Joe, if you'd
come forward and make your presentation. I --
MR. LUTHER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- appreciate you being
here, and thank you for your service.
MR. LUTHER: Thank you very much, Commissioner
Baldwin, Judge, members of the Commission. Good morning.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Good morning.
MR. LUTHER: I am the Chairman. I don't know what
I was thinking of. I'm thinking about presidential
elections; I'm sure that's it. As you know, we recently
concluded an extended exhibition over at the Kerr Arts and
Cultural Center about the indigenous people of Kerr County.
When I was a boy growing up here, and as a boy scout, I was
in love with Indian lore, and, of course, odds are you'd find
me running around in the hills with bows and loincloths and
things that today would probably get you arrested.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was going to say, we --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't need to see that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You've stopped that, haven't
you?
MR. LUTHER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN
It's not a real good
picture.
MR. LUTHER: Well, but I was always fascinated by
5-27-08
78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in 1858, as if humanity sprang out of the ground here with
the arrival of the Schreiner family and others. But, in
fact, humankind was here for some 10,000 years, and there are
archeological sites up on the Divide that are burial sites
that have been dated back 10,000 years. We need to realize
also that as part of our history, that this area where we are
right now was Spain for some 300 years, so the United States
of America is a fairly recent addition.
As part of our efforts to help in the education of
people about their heritage and history, we did this
exhibition on indigenous people, and one of the finest pieces
of work that we found was this piece of work by George
Nelson, who is from Tarpley, and he's a very accomplished
artist and has done a wonderful series on the Alamo and other
things. But this particular poster that we have framed back
here that -- in the back of the room, displays the Lipon
Apache as they would have appeared here between 1720 and --
and 1880, so they were here quite a while. There is a
documented site down by Camp Verde, just across on the other
side of Verde Creek where the buffalo roam, that was, in
fact, an Apache -- series of Apache villages for over 100
years, and is recorded on old Spanish maps. These people
5-27-08
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
were not nearly as disagreeable as the Comanches, and, in
fact, worked as scouts and worked with the Texas Rangers and
others. So, I have talked with Commissioner Baldwin and Tim
and Commissioner Williams about the Historical Commission
giving this to the people of Kerr County, and we've selected
a spot out here in the hallway to hang this, and I believe
Tim approved it. And --
MS. BOLIN: Whoa.
MR. LUTHER: Was that a "no"?
MS. PIEPER: A "whoa."
MR. LUTHER: So, with your kind permission, the
Kerr County Historical Commission, herewith and forthwith,
presents to you folks this wonderful image produced by George
Nelson.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Great.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we get that thing up
here? Do you want to get a photograph of it?
MR. LUTHER: Yes, if you don't mind.
JUDGE TINLEY: Put on your loincloth first, Buster.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. LUTHER: I would also like at this time to
introduce to you Sue Dyke, who is the vice chairperson of the
Commission.
(Discussion off the record.)
5-27-08
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
MR. LUTHER: I need to come in there?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why not?
MR. LUTHER: Hallowed ground here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The throne.
JUDGE TINLEY: Set it right here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Come on, Sue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll all peer over the
top.
JUDGE TINLEY: There you go.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Crowd in. Crowd in up front,
Judge.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. LUTHER: Most of those Pedernales arrowheads
you find out here actually are spear points.
MS. VAN WINKLE: Okay, Joe? (Took photo.) One
more.
MR. BOLLIER: Is the camera cracked?
MS. VAN WINKLE: Not yet.
MR. LUTHER: Well, thank God. I don't have to hold
my stomach in. (Laughter.)
MS. VAN WINKLE: We got some good smiles on that
one. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Suck it in.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Joe.
5-27-08
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank y'all so much.
MR. LUTHER: You bet. It's a real pleasure, and
thank you for doing this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Beautiful.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like to thank the
Historical Commission for going back into some of those older
periods, looking at the indigenous peoples. It is a lot of
the history. A lot of us are aware of it, finding the -- or
various artifacts, and I think it's a lot more -- I'm just
glad to see them focusing on that instead of some of the
other history, starting in --
MR. LUTHER: May I just say, we're right on the
verge of a very exciting partnership with Schreiner
University and their digital library collection, and a safe
place to archive our artifacts and things, and I'll be coming
back to you about that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You might look at, at some
point, after you've been over to the Peterson Foundation
offices. They have a remarkable arrowhead, for lack of
another word, collection that was left to them under the
estate of one of my -- my grandmother's first cousin, Bruda
Ingenhuett, and they --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What was the name?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bruda.
5-27-08
82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bruda.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bruda and Emma Ingenhuett.
And, it's -- and it came off their Turkey Knob Ranch, which
is actually right in Kendall County, right across the county
line, but it is an absolutely phenomenal collection. They
have it on display there.
MR. LUTHER: I might also say, just one other
exciting piece of business. We've pinpointed the exact
location of Camp Ives, which was a subpost of Camp Verde, and
we're going to move to get a marker for that. And in the
course of that search, we also discovered that there was
another army outpost in Bandera Pass called Camp Devant,
which we are working on getting the details on that. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is any work being done at all
to do anything with the Apache encampment you talked about,
where the buffalo roam currently at Camp Verde?
MR. LUTHER: Yes, there is, but it's sort of a
plodding process. I refer to that area as the Camp Verde
complex, because there's just so much there. There's the
frontier battalion stuff that was there, the Texas Rangers
stuff, the Camp Verde stuff, the old store.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Prison Canyon.
MR. LUTHER: Prison Canyon is certainly a big one.
Some people want historical markers, and others don't want
them anywhere near. And so what we're looking at is getting
5-27-08
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
some National Register markers for some of this, and having
it in that little park across from the store.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I suspect that the people that
own most of that property, or a large part of that property
now will be very willing to work with you.
MR. LUTHER: Well, okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They will be.
MR. LUTHER: Yeah. I was down at the store this
weekend and discovered that the store's now owned by a
corporation out of San Antonio.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, but that corporation will
be glad to work with you, I'm pretty sure.
MR. LUTHER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you were talking about
the buffalo roam. I just wanted to let you know that the
deer and antelope play at 2 o'clock this afternoon.
(Laughter.)
MR. LUTHER: I missed that on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's confidential
information.
MR. LUTHER: Well, as is always the case with this
Commission, seldom is heard a discouraging word. Thank you,
gentlemen. (Applause.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tivy fight never dies.
5-27-08
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: You'll be there with your loincloth
on, I presume?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One feather in your ear.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go back to Item 16. I think
there was some additional matters to be reported there under
that item?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I was looking at this
one when the Judge read it. It said "other matters," and I
know I added "other matters" for a reason, and then it dawned
on me after we passed that. The other matters were two, and
it's kind of to get the Court -- just advise the Court. One,
there's a lot of dirt that several years ago was piled up
along the bottom of the fencing around the airport, and the
current Airport Board desires to remove that dirt, 'cause
it's destroying the fence. And Commissioner Williams and I
talked with the interim Airport Manager, Mr. McKenzie, and
said we would do what we could to get trustees as available,
and/or community service out there to do that work over the
next year or so. There's nothing in a rush. So, we just
thought that we would get that -- let the Sheriff be aware of
that, that there's a project that at least two of the
Commissioners, and I think the whole Court thinks is a very
worthwhile project that will save the taxpayers money.
'Cause if it's not done by community service, it's going to
5-27-08
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
which is -- I guess it's part county road till it gets to --
I guess it's all city road now. Anyway, the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To the second entrance.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: To the second entrance inside
Charlie Hastings and his people in the City have been working
with Len Odom and our people at the County, and they have
come to a joint solution where the County will do the actual
work for the rehabilitation of their sealcoating, and the
City will provide all of the materials. And Len's going to
be doing this out of his current budget. And time is --
there's really no dollars for him; it's just a matter of
scheduling his personnel to do the work, and the City will be
expending the funds. This is not included as a capital item
for the airport for this year, though it has been discussed
by the Airport Board several times as it needed to be done.
And it's just a good opportunity, I think, for us to work
with the City and get something accomplished and save the
taxpayers money. So, I just wanted to get those on the
table, that we're -- those are in the works. I don't think
we need any action on them; I think those -- all parties
involved have authority to do it.
5-27-08
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. The reality is that
Leonard has a major crew out on Johnson Drive right now, and
Shady Grove, so it's just a matter of moving over and taking
care of this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. So, anyway, I just
wanted to get those two items on the record.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it's a very, very
good first start to get some things going between the City
and the County on some of the roadwork.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's exactly right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This could be the very first
one of those. It would -- hopefully, there will be more.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Kind of a little pilot
project, right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This has got less than
1,000 yards of road, I think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, not a lot. Okay, that
was it. That's the only two items.
JUDGE TINLEY: Great way to ease into trying to set
up a process by which there can be that cooperative effort on
-- 'cause the City has a need for a lot of street
improvements, and I think we've got the equipment and the
personnel and the know-how that can assist them there, and I
think it creates some efficiency for the ultimate payer of
5-27-08
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
the bill, and that's our taxpayers. Let's go to Item 17, if
we might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
review the services of GovDeals, Inc. That organization
provides a means for sellers to list items for sale and for
potential buyers to bid upon these items via an
Internet-based auction system. Ms. Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: We had a meeting with the
representative of GovDeals, with Commissioner Oehler,
Commissioner Baldwin, the Sheriff, John Trolinger, and myself
on Thursday to discuss this possibility of using these
auction services. I would like actually to defer to
Commissioner Oehler and Mr. -- or Commissioner Baldwin as to
their thoughts on -- on whether they are interested, or what
they'd like to do about this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, my comment is that I
don't know how much we use a service like this, but I know
that we've used it some. And this particular company that
I'm -- that I'm fairly familiar with, I've met some of the
players and visited with them in the last couple of years,
and they appear to be the cutting edge of this type of
business. They appear to be probably the largest company in
the country that does this kind of work, and -- but bottom
line, it's not going to give me heartburn to go either way,
but it -- you know, if we feel like that we need to contract
with some company to take care of these kinds of issues, this
5-27-08
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
company is a good company to do it. I firmly believe that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, the only thing I would
say about it is, it seems to me like they don't do much for
what they get paid. I mean, they do have a wide circulation,
and they have a wide range of people that use or actually get
on that -- in the -- within their web site to do the bidding.
They probably have more contacts than anybody else. But they
charge 7 and a half percent, and we do all the work. We post
it, we collect the money, we send them the money. And,
really, we're just utilizing their web site, is basically it.
And that may be within the realm of reality of what we should
do. I don't know. I know that last year, Tommy put a lot of
stuff on eBay, and we were very successful in that, and eBay
is a lot cheaper than this. We basically have to do the same
thing. We're going to do all the work to do it on eBay. I
just don't know. I mean, yes, I'm sure this gets more hits,
and we might get more money out of it, but I don't know if
it's worth it to try or not. We get on it -- we can get off
of it any time; we don't have to -- there's no -- there's no
money involved if you sign up, to my knowledge. It's just --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're not hooked into a
time frame?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, we can cancel at any
time. And the only time you pay is whenever you sell
something that you listed on their web site.
5-27-08
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. There's a lot of
people that look at it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's the advantage.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How many hits did he say he
I had?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Millions.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Millions. Millions.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, you know, one of the
problems I hear about eBay -- I've never bought anything
through eBay, but eBay's gotten so big, it's so -- it's
cumbersome to use. I mean, there's just -- you can't find
anything, 'cause there's just so much there. And if this is
able to focus things better, you know, to me it may be
worthwhile trying it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, this is only for
government; they don't let anybody else sell on it. It's
just for government, surplus equipment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So you're not going to get the
knack-knack type stuff.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. You may find a lot of
stuff that's completely worn out, which is generally what
happens whenever you put it up for sale.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's government.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But I'm not really in
opposition to it. I just -- you know, just wanted to point
5-27-08
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that out, that their percentage is fairly high.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is, but I guess you're
paying for their -- their widespread operation.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. Well, if you -- if
you got 50 percent more for it than you would have gotten the
other way, then it's a good deal. Or if you get more than
the 7 and a half percent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Get 7 and a half percent or
8 percent more.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, I'm not in opposition to
it. I just wanted to point that out.
JUDGE TINLEY: Has the County Attorney reviewed
this agreement?
MR. EMERSON: I have, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: And?
MR. EMERSON: There's not any real liability in
there for the County. The positive thing is that it's a
nonexclusive agreement, so we could sign contracts with
multiple agencies, and as long as we don't post
simultaneously on different web sites, we don't have any
conflicts.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we can get out, what,
in 30 days notice?
JUDGE TINLEY: Sixty.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sixty days notice.
5-27-08
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I -- I mean, I don't see a
reason not to do it and try it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Don't know till we try.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, I'll make a motion that we
enter into an agreement with GovDeals, an Internet-based
auction service, for -- or system for disposing of items
declared surplus by the County.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion?
MS. HARGIS: There is one thing. We'll have to
have two contracts, one for the County as a whole and then
one for the seized property. And that's fairly common,
because --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What property?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Seized.
MS. HARGIS: Seized property. So, we'll have two.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My motion reflects that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Further question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Item 18;
5-27-08
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
consider, discuss, take appropriate action on medical
insurance lab claims against our policy. That is noted as an
executive session item, but I'm having some difficulty --
MS. HYDE: It's supposed to be maybe.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's more a generic type service.
MS. HYDE: Supposed to be maybe.
JUDGE TINLEY: Supposed to be maybe?
MS. HYDE: It depends on what kind of questions the
Court asks.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, let's do what we can in
open, okay?
(Commissioner Baldwin held up an envelope.)
MS. HYDE: Okay. I haven't even got up there yet.
Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My question is real simple.
What the hell is this?
MS. HYDE: I don't know; I haven't seen it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a bill I received. Is
that one of them?
MS. HYDE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh. Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now you understand it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now I understand it.
That's -- it's all clear; I got to go pay it.
MS. HYDE: Okay. The ones I gave you, there should
5-27-08
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
I be some extras.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There will be.
MS. HYDE: So that Cheryl can have one.
JUDGE TINLEY: I got one.
MS. HYDE: And then the second one, this is one
that everybody reviewed during open enrollment.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They're all together,
right?
MS. HYDE: No, there's two separate so that y'all
can do them side by side, 'cause I know y'all like looking
side by side. Cheryl, did you get one of these?
(Discussion off the record.)
MS. HYDE: Here's an original, Rex. I'll give you
this one as soon as I get done. The original bottom line, if
you go on the original that was reviewed with everyone, I
circled them so everyone could see them, and what it said was
laboratory services as a result of the office visit,
excluding high-end radiology, 100 percent deductible was
waived. And if you go to Page 2, it says independent
freestanding clinic. The reason why is because here in Kerr
County, everybody was freestanding clinics unless you went to
a hospital, but that's changed. During the first of the
year, that's changed, so most of our freestanding clinics now
belong to hospitals, which means the rates are more, which
means it's costing us much more. And so the suggestion is,
5-27-08
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
because this is what it says, that's why there's a proposed,
to allow the employees that have already used the
non-freestanding clinics to be reimbursed for this, because
they did exactly what was said on this form. And then we
make it effective June lst, that we send out information to
everyone, we get everyone's -- you know, making sure
everyone's read it and understands that after June 1st, if
you go to someplace that is not a freestanding clinic, you
will pay your deductible, and for most people, that's the
problem. They had not paid their deductible, and they needed
to have annual physicals so that they could work. So, their
physicals and lab work came back and it was three and four
times what it had been in the past, so it's really hurt a lot
of employees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you said there's -- I
thought you said there were no freestanding clinics.
MS. HYDE: There's very few. In fact, there's
three.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's a freestanding clinic?
MS. HYDE: It means they are not -- they were not
billing as a hospital; they're billing as a freestanding
clinic.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can you give me the names of
the three so I know what we're talking about?
(Ms. Hyde handed a document to Commissioner Letz.)
5-27-08
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
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, Clinical Pathology Labs are
not freestanding clinics?
MS. HYDE: No, these are.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They are freestanding?
MS. HYDE: They are freestanding clinics.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're the only ones?
MS. HYDE: That we know of, yes. The other closest
one is in Boerne, and so it's out of the county.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, the good thing is that
we do still have some that can be used by the employees.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, the -- the employees need
to go to -- I mean, to get -- financially, it's better off
for them to go to this one -- to this clinic than anywhere
else.
MS. HYDE: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they -- it's up to --
that's an employee choice issue as to where they get lab work
done.
MS. HYDE: To be fair to the employees, this is
what was reviewed to them, and this is what we said, because
we based it on the fact that we had so many freestanding
clinics. Well, now that they've been pulled in, this isn't
the case. So, really, Page 2, where it says independent
freestanding diagnostic X-ray and lab facility services, that
5-27-08
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
-- that is it. Now, it's 90 percent deductible waived. On
the front page, if you went to the doctor and the doctor
said, "Okay, you need to go have blood work done," you went
to the lab to have your blood work done, we'll pay 100
percent; deductible was waived. But because now we have so
many that are billing underneath a hospital bill, we can't
waive the deductible. It comes under a totally separate
charge and different type of charge, and so people are
getting $400 and $500 bills from pathology.
JUDGE TINLEY: And what you're suggesting that the
Court needs to do is to take appropriate action to permit
those folks who, up through --
MS. HYDE: No fault of their own.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- May 31 of this year, --
MS. HYDE: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- relied upon the schedule of
benefits that the deductible would be waived for any
laboratory services as a result of a doctor's office visit,
excluding the high-end radiological, would be reimbursed for
the deductible that they did have to pay?
MS. HYDE: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that, effective June 1, we amend
our schedule of benefits to provide that that deductible
would be waived only in those cases when using a preferred
provider, being the Clinical Pathology lab provider?
5-27-08
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
MS. HYDE: Right, exactly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That poses a question.
Suppose your doctor wants you to have some of these
particular tests, and says they want you to go to the
Ambulatory Care Center of the Peterson Regional Medical
center for those services.
MS. HYDE: If that's the case, then you'll file in
your normal deductible -- normal deductibles. If they bill
under a hospital billing, then you'll have to pay your
deductible.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or as opposed to going to
CPL.
MS. HYDE: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the deductible is
waived.
MS. HYDE: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm probably going to have
an argument with my doctor about that.
MS. HYDE: Well, what we've done is we've talked to
several of the doctors in the area as well. Last month, when
our insurance folks came in, we did a search and recon of the
area for anybody that -- that was laboratories, and we went
and visited with them, including those that had just turned
over underneath a hospital billing. And when we talked with
5-27-08
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
the doctors -- we talked to 15 doctors in the area. They
ranged anywhere from gastroenterologist or whatever you call
it -- the stomach, cancer, normal GP's, children's, the whole
nine yards. We got a little bit of everybody. And because
they already have a lot of those paperwork that they fill out
and say, "Here," you know, "go get your lab work," but CPL
will accept those -- those lab forms and will utilize those
lab forms. So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What about lab services
that are performed in the doctor's office?
MS. HYDE: Well, those will still file underneath
the office visit. So, that's why we've got this. If you
guys approve it, this will be a -- a stock -- not a stocking
stuffer, a check stuffer, and we'll review it, make sure
everybody gets an e-mail as well. I know that the 5.0. will
help in making sure that that gets out to his large group.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does it say on here -- the
hospital portion, is it on this sheet? Like, if you go to a
hospital, where is their line?
MS. HYDE: If you go to -- if you -- are you
looking on the original, or are you looking -- is it the
original?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. Where does it say what I
pay if I go to the hospital? I see at the bottom --
MS. HYDE: Where it says hospital services.
5-27-08
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But is it -- is it ancillaries?
MS. HYDE: Well, what it says is on that second
page, where it talks about independent freestanding
diagnostic X-ray and lab facility services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. HYDE: 90 percent deductible is waived, on
Page 2.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it goes under that one?
MS. HYDE: It will -- it'll go -- it'll go under --
if you go to an independent freestanding diagnostic X-ray and
lab, 90 percent means the employee pays 10 percent and no
deductible. However, comma, if you go to a hospital, you're
going to pay your deductible first, and then it goes to
90/20.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- but --
MS. HYDE: I mean 90/10.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, services -- the lab work
comes under the ancillary services under this.
MS. HYDE: Yeah. Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that would be -- if we
can add that on here, I think it would make it clearer to
people. Because if you look under hospital, you don't see
lab stuff.
MS. HYDE: No, because --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Add on here that if you go --
5-27-08
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
if this is done through the hospital, it's going to be 90
percent after the deductible. Then that way, the -- it's on
here three times. I think it's easier for employees to see
what's going on.
JUDGE TINLEY: Where it says miscellaneous
services, add "including laboratory work"?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, including laboratory
I work.
JUDGE TINLEY: Services, yeah.
MS. HYDE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On this summary plan that's
included in this handout.
MS. HYDE: Right. If you notice, the new one --
the new one is a little bit different.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The new one being the
separate one?
MS. HYDE: Yeah, the one that says "proposed."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I got you.
MS. HYDE: And under -- under hospital, again, it
does not have anything in there about that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think just add it on. This
is one of those. Don't worry about changing the old one;
just change the new one.
MS. HYDE: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That makes it clear. If I read
5-27-08
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
there were a lot of things that were -- that were paid prior
to deductible.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if you go with CPL, it
still is paid prior to deductible?
MS. HYDE: Yes, that's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just think you need to make
it real clear, under hospital services, lab work is not
covered or is not paid that way.
MS. HYDE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Probably ought to be
highlighted in red.
MS . HYDE : Hmm?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Highlighted in red.
MS. HYDE: Well, we highlighted this in yellow.
So, we're hoping between that and -- there's a lot of people
that have been impacted, so word of mouth is going to help us
with this as well.
JUDGE TINLEY: You had a question?
MR. EMERSON: I do, but it's going to rebound
directly onto Jeannie and Eva. If the County chooses to do
this, and say they reimburse Rusty $200 for a mistake in the
deductible, is that going to fall under compensation for
purposes of I.R.S. codes?
MS. HYDE: Hmm-mm. No, 'cause what it is, it's an
error in the insurance.
5-27-08
103
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So, whose pocket is that
coming out of? The County?
MS. HYDE: Coming out of our insurance.
JUDGE TINLEY: Out of ours.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 'Cause I do have -- not me.
I do have several employees that ended up with $500-plus
bills, okay? Because they had no idea it wasn't going to get
paid. And then their deductible's more than that, so they're
totally out over $500 all of a sudden that they wouldn't have
been last year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see -- I saw a concern on the
County Attorney's face by your answer. I think we need to
make sure that it's not going to be counted as compensation,
to verify that, either through -- however you verify things,
what's compensation and not.
MS. HYDE: Are you saying yes behind me?
MR. EMERSON: I'm just thinking -- I think it needs
to be verified before we do it.
MS. HYDE: Well, we've done it in the past, so I
can show you how we did it and why.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. HYDE: And I'm not saying our office. It's
been done for a long time.
MR. EMERSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's required of us
5-27-08
104
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
today?
MS. HYDE: To say okey-dokey to what he said.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we probably need to do
a court order, since we're changing somebody --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Judge basically had a
motion. He was thinking out loud, but it was really a pretty
good motion.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Think he can repeat it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He asked me, do I think that
you can repeat it, and I say no, I don't think you can.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think I can come close.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'll second it if it
comes out real close.
JUDGE TINLEY: What I said was what you're seeking
today from the Court is an action to permit reimbursement by
employees who were charged a deductible for laboratory
services as a result of office visits up through May 31 of
this year, and commencing June 1 of this year, that our
schedule of benefits be changed to provide that the waiver of
deductible only apply to laboratory services as a result of
the office visit when it is done using a preferred provider,
that being Clinical Pathology Labs, being the only local one.
MS. HYDE: And maybe that's where you and I are
5-27-08
105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
looking at it differently. You're hearing reimbursement, and
what we're saying is that -- not reimbursement to the
employee, but reimbursement that the deductible is paid. And
that way, the reimbursement does not come from Kerr County;
the reimbursement would come from wherever they had --
wherever they paid. For example, if I had to pay a
hospital -- if I had to pay a hospital because it was my
deductible, and I had to pay $500, and come to find out there
was an insurance error and I did not have to pay that
deductible, the insurance would then pay that hospital, and
the hospital has to reimburse the employee.
MR. EMERSON: If there's an insurance error.
MS. HYDE: Yeah, because this would be considered
an insurance error.
MR. EMERSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Who made the motion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll make the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You tried, Buster.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: One of these days you're
going to make it. He's going to slip up and say, "I do."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Judge says, "What are
y'all talking about?"
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
5-27-08
106
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
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. Okay.
MR. ODOM: The bids -- may I approach the Court?
On the bids, do you wish me to take a look at those? Can I
see if they meet and we award it today, if that's possible?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you hurry up.
MR. ODOM: I need -- does Cheryl have them?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If Cheryl doesn't, nobody
does.
JUDGE TINLEY: Appears to me that -- that 19, 20,
and 21 are, in fact, executive session items. I am assuming
that to be the case, unless the County Attorney indicates to
the contrary right now. 19, 20, and 21, executive session
items dealing with individual employees?
MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's move to Section 4,
then, of the agenda.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's got something on his bids.
MR. BOLLIER: Judge, I'm ready to make my
recommendations on the concrete work.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We'll go ahead and go
5-27-08
107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
back to Item 4 -- revisit Agenda Item 4 concerning 4,400
square feet of concrete for the storage area out at the Youth
Exhibit Center area, Kerr County Fairgrounds. Mr. Bollier,
you have a recommendation?
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir. Out of the bids that I
received on the -- both concrete projects, I found that one
did not follow directions; therefore, it was -- I excluded it
from the bunch. And therefore, I recommend that Freed and
Barker get both projects -- concrete projects.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll do them one at a time.
MR. BOLLIER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: The 4,400 square foot --
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir. Freed and Barker.
JUDGE TINLEY: Freed and Barker?
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dollars?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In the amount of?
MR. BOLLIER: Oh, y'all didn't tell me I have to
write it down.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $15,793. Does that help
you?
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're recommending the Court
approve that bid for the 4,400 square feet of concrete --
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
5-27-08
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: -- at the Youth Exhibit Center?
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of Freed -- award of the bid to Freed and Barker for
the 4,400 square feet of concrete at the Youth Exhibit Center
project for $15,793. 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 go to
Item 5. Do you have a recommendation with regard to the 648
square feet of concrete sidewalk, being the removal of the
existing sidewalk and the replacement?
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir. My recommendation is Freed
and Barker again. They -- even though they weren't quite the
lowest bid there -- I mean, the other one -- Freed and Barker
was $8,940, and the closest one to them was -- was -- well,
he was actually $90 less -- I think its $90 -- Tom Mall. But
I would recommend Freed and Barker.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And how much?
MR. BOLLIER: What I have here is $8,900 -- no --
5-27-08
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
yeah, $8,940.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve
award of the bid for the 648 square feet of concrete removal
and replacement at the courthouse for Freed and Barker for
$8, 940.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the reason you choose to
do their bid over the other one?
MR. BOLLIER: Why? I -- if it would have been a
whole lot more, I would have thought about it a whole lot
harder, but I know what kind of work Freed and Barker does.
I do not know this Tom Mall.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is the Freed and Barker bid higher
or lower?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: $90 higher.
MR. BOLLIER: $90 higher.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, $90 higher than the Mall
bid.
MR. BOLLIER: No special reason.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think we normally take the
low bidder if we're bidding the same thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: County Attorney? The
recommendation is to go with a bid that's not the low bid,
based on the past performance of the contractor. Is that
5-27-08
110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
okay? Can we do that? I mean, low bid is $90 lower than the
bid that's being recommended.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's based on knowing the
higher bid's performance, not knowing any performance on the
low bid.
MR. EMERSON: If you don't go with the low bid, the
statute calls basically for you to allow an opportunity for
the low bidder to come in and explain before you reject their
bid. That's what it says in 262.
MR. BOLLIER: I have no problem with that, that I
can go to Tom Mall. I have not a problem with that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think that would be the
wise thing to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a recommendation you go
to Tom Mall. If you're -- meet with him. If you're
uncomfortable with him --
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- then go with Freed and
Barker.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the Tom Mall figure is how much?
MS. HARGIS: 8,850.
MR. BOLLIER: 8,850.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, you're recommending the bid be
awarded for removal and replacement of 648 square feet of
5-27-08
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
concrete here at the courthouse to Thomas Mall Concrete for
8, 850?
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, I am.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's the motion, and if
that -- if there's a reason that you're uncomfortable with
that bid, you don't think the person can do the work, the
secondary bid is Freed and Barker at $8,940.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I have a motion. Do I have a
second?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You have a second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 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. Okay.
MR. BOLLIER: On the air-conditioners, Item 1.6,
Judge --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let me call that.
MR. BOLLIER: On that, I want to defer that until
next meeting, until next Commissioners Court, because there's
too much -- there's too much money difference in between some
of these bids, and I'm not quite sure exactly what they're
5-27-08
112
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
doing. I would like to just have extra time to -- till next
Commissioners Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: To review the specs and how they've
jockeyed around?
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you.
MR. BOLLIER: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Odom's, Judge.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I'll recall Item 9; consider,
discuss, take appropriate action to open and award bid for
C-7500 truck equipped with an aerial bucket and chip box.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. I didn't hear all the -- the
discussion that Tim had, but I have two bids, one for 69,9,
and then one for 65,000. The Ufleet had under 10,000 miles,
which we wanted. It had 8,200 miles. It was from Yuma,
Arizona, and we called, and it was a good -- it was just not
used that much. It was seven years, and they replaced it.
The one I got from Terex has over 31,000, and I just feel --
my recommendation is based upon, if it's legal, that I would
pay more money. I -- what little we know about the Yuma
Ufleet, that it's a better -- I feel more comfortable with
it, with 82.
JUDGE TINLEY: Your specs, in fact, provided for
10,000 miles or less, did it not?
5-27-08
113
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: Absolutely, they did.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That throws out the first bid,
then, so the only bid that's valid is the --
MR. ODOM: Is the Ufleet? Yeah, the other one's
31,000, and it looks like it's been worn a little bit.
JUDGE TINLEY: And the Ufleet is 69 -- how much?
MR. ODOM: 69,900.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's your recommendation?
MR. ODOM: That's my recommendation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I support the recommendation of
the Road and Bridge Administrator to go with Ufleet.
MR. ODOM: Ufleet.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: At 69 --
MR. ODOM: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 69,9?
MR. ODOM: 69,9.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second to
award the C-7500 truck equipped with an aerial bucket and
chip box per the only buyer that -- only proposer that met
specs of 10,000 miles or less, that being Ufleet, for the
award of $69,900. 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.
5-27-08
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank you,
sir.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Thank y'all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's now go to Section 4 of the
agenda, payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to pay the
bills. Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have some questions.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is just -- I'm sure
every question I have is just information more than anything,
just to kind of bring me up to speed on what this stuff
means. Commissioners Court, Page 3. Jody Grinstead,
reimbursement, food. Oh, county-to-county meeting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. We provided the
food for --
COMMISSIONER
think the Hill Country
COMMISSIONER
Communications, the th
surcharge. What is --
MS. HARGIS:
LETZ: We provided part of it, and I
Alliance provided part of it.
BALDWIN: Page 7, Windstream
ird item there. Telephone, taxes, and
why is that separated out?
I can't answer that.
5-27-08
115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can anybody?
MS. HARGIS: She probably does that because that's
not the phone itself, so that it shows on our -- on our GL
that she paid for it as a separate item. It's probably more
of an accounting -- but I'll have to check. I can't answer
that. I looked at it --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: "She"?
MS. HARGIS: The accounts payable clerk probably
wanted to be able to identify that as a separate line item.
But other than that answer, I don't -- I don't have a good
answer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That's an interesting
answer.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the next line, UTID
calls? What's that?
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure hope we're not writing and
mailing separate checks for it.
MS. HARGIS: It all rolls up in one check.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Twenty-six cents.
Whatever.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 11.
MS. HARGIS: I will get the answer, though.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Page 11, 216th
District Court, Cindy Snider, court trap -- not sure what all
that is. Is this -- we're paying somebody -- we pay
5-27-08
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Ms. Snider to do a job, and then we're paying somebody else
to do the same job?
MS. HARGIS: No, that's the case that she did the
transcript for. She -- Cindy gets paid extra for producing
transcripts.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what he wanted you to
say.
MS. HARGIS: Huh?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what he wanted you to
say, the last part. She's being paid extra for doing the job
she's being paid to do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I thought you'd
say. And then --
MS. HARGIS: I didn't sign the contract.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, is this Robert
Falkenberg and John Carlson, are those attorneys?
JUDGE TINLEY: I know Carlson is. Falkenberg
apparently is. He's been appointed to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Child Protective Services
cases. And that's in 198th District.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's some lawyers working for
free on those, but we don't seem to get any of those here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Next page, 198th District
Court. Premiere Reporting, court transcripts. Do we pay
5-27-08
117
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
someone to do a job and then we pay somebody else to do the
same job?
MS. HARGIS: I can't answer that one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Chicken.
JUDGE TINLEY: Same answer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The answer is yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It seems to be -- you know,
I've been asking that question for a number of years, and it
seems like I've been getting the same answer every time.
I -- you know, if you -- if you pay somebody to do a job and
then you pay somebody else to do the same job, I mean, how
stupid are we?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're paying the same person to
do the same job.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Unbelievable. Unbelievable.
Page 38.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who -- you made the comment,
you don't sign the contract. Ms. Hargis, you said that a
second ago, I think somewhat in jest, but who does sign those
contracts that decides what these court reporters get paid?
Is it done by the District Judges?
MS. HARGIS: I would assume it would be.
JUDGE TINLEY: They approve the payment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The payment. But, I mean --
but there's obviously a contract that covers their services.
5-27-08
118
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There should be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, and who signs that
contract? 'Cause I don't think judges have authority to sign
contracts for this disbursement of funds.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think I signed any. They --
there's a daily rate that they agree to pay. There's a
half-day rate and a full-day rate that they normally pay.
And on a per-job basis for transcription, for example, that's
by the page. They get paid by the page for that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But is there -- is there such a
thing as a contract with -- or, you know, employee job
description? I mean, they get paid based on something.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know if there's a contract.
MS. HARGIS: I couldn't answer that.
JUDGE TINLEY: It'd be interesting to find out,
'cause Commissioner Baldwin has asked the question for years,
and we always get the same answer. But the issue is, if
there is a contract for those services, the key would be to
change the contract. That way you wouldn't be paying them
twice.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's too simple.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's way too simple, Jon.
That's not going to happen.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: The other possibility would be to
5-27-08
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
119
change the job description of the reporter.
MS. WILLIAMS: Commissioner Letz, a lot of times
these transcripts are on indigent cases. The defendant is
indigent, and they have -- they have to do the transcripts.
The County winds up having to foot the bill. And sometimes
the court reporter may be with the judge in another county;
you have a visiting judge who's sitting here. They have to
have a court reporter to take the -- the -- like Kathy does.
And then a lot of times, if there's a transcript needed out
of that, that's why you'll have somebody other than your
actual court reporter, who is an employee.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, that helps.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good explanation. Thank you, Mindy.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 38.
MS. HARGIS: Thank you, Mindy.
MS. WILLIAMS: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Durrin's Cleaners, uniforms.
Do we -- I mean, really, I don't know. Do -- does the
Environmental Health Department take their clothes down to
Durrin's Cleaners and have them pressed? Do you do that,
Rusty?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. The only time we -- the
County pays for any of our Durrin's Cleaner stuff is if I've
had an employee quit or -- or leave or whatever, and we get
some old uniforms back that are dirty. We may have them --
5-27-08
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
120
have them cleaned so that we can store them and reissue them
I later. The only other time is if I promoted somebody and
stripes need to be sewn on or something like that, then we
pay for that. But the day -- the cleaning, the employees
have to pay for out of their own pocket, period.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I know that khakis and
a white shirt is considered a uniform, and -- in government
circles, or at least my circle, and I was wondering if the
County would be interested in paying mine -- my laundry.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe we can get you into
Tim's uniform list.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tim, who does yours?
MR. BOLLIER: UniFirst.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: UniFirst?
MR. BOLLIER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the same thing, isn't
it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not saying that it
should or shouldn't be. I'm just trying to -- I'm trying to
decide here. So, UniFirst is just like going to Durrin's
Cleaners?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It says --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Produce clean uniforms,
turn in dirty ones.
s-2~-oa
121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They press them and make
them real pretty?
MR. BOLLIER: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: And they have the ability -- they
don't have to be like this. They can -- they got them in
khakis, white Oxford shirts, if you want that, with logos.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Various sizes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. The question would be whether
or not that should be includable for tax purposes to you as
additional compensation.
MR. BOLLIER: We've avoided that issue over at
Maintenance, because there are patches and logos, and we
don't provide the pants. We just provide the shirts.
MS. HARGIS: Far as I know, in Environmental Health
they just provide the hats and the shirts.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I am way past that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess the question, why
doesn't Environmental Health use a uniform service instead of
going to Durrin's Cleaners?
MS. HARGIS: I don't know. You got me.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I will try to find out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe it's cheaper.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only issue I would say is, it
may open up a can of worms, because if the County's going to
pay for cleaning for employees' uniforms, I've got about 70
5-27-08
122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of them that sure are going to raise heck with me if the
~ County's not paying it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that's in the back
of our mind.
I SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's going to be in the front
of mine when they hear about this, I can tell you.
MR. BOLLIER: And also, when UniFirst -- I mean,
y'all probably know this. UniFirst replaces your clothes as
soon as they -- if you rip them, they can't be fixed, they
replace them with no charge. And once your pants start
getting -- once your pants start getting faded way out,
they'll replace those too without no charge.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That was all my questions.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're pretty expensive on
that kind of stuff.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Speaking of opening up a can of
worms --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know what y'all are
talking about. I just -- I just had a simple question.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other question or
discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I have one. It's a
short one. I notice in the County Auditor's, there's only --
there's only been two checks written in the last two weeks.
5-27-08
123
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's Frances Kaiser.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 21. So, those are the only
two bills in your office that are having to be paid? The
rest of them come at the first of the month, and there will
be a lot longer list? I only see two items, $7.18 and the
contract $1,180.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, look who walked in.
We just finished talking about Durrin's Cleaners, and look
who walks in.
MR. WHATLEY: Is there a problem?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
MS. HARGIS: We haven't been -- we haven't ordered
a lot of office supplies or anything of that nature right
now. The only other bill that was submitted was from my
conference reimbursement. As far as I know, that's all we've
done.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay, I was just asking.
MS. HARGIS: We try to buy our supplies -- we have
at least a three-month supply of paper and things of that
nature when we buy, and toner. We're a small office; we
don't really have that much.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's not a compliant being lodged
s-2~-os
124
I
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 you're not spending enough money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's not a complaint, okay?
MS. HARGIS: That we don't spend?
I
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MS. HARGIS: To be honest, you know, I don't
necessarily watch every -- you know, but I do sign them, and
I didn't sign that many for ours.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll be quiet.
JUDGE TINLEY: All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we have
any budget amendments? Budget amendments?
MS. HARGIS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Late bills?
MS. HARGIS: No late bills.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I've been presented with
monthly reports from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2; County
Clerk, both general and trust fund; and Constable, Precinct
3. Do I hear a motion that these reports be approved as
5-27-08
125
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval as presented. Question or discussion? All in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Okay. Do
we have any reports from any of the Commissioners in
connection with their liaison or committee assignments? One?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Two?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only that the door-to-door
canvassing on the EDAP application for Water Development
Board is completed. Waiting on the Community Resource Group
to crunch some numbers and give us the report.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it? Three?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If anybody wants to go to Camp
Wood tomorrow, Region J has a meeting at -- 9:00?
MS. GRINSTEAD: 10:00.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10 o'clock. There will be a
public meeting to comment on the scope of work, followed by
the board meeting. And --
5-27-08
126
1
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: Boy, I want to go to that
thing so bad.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Ms. Hargis, I presume, saw
my e-mail this morning that I've finished the very rough
draft of the -- of the 2006-2007 management discussion that
somehow landed in my lap several years ago. And I'm working
with her; we'll have that hopefully by our first meeting in
June for approval by the Court. So, any -- any highlights of
that year that you happen to think of, just let me know and
I'll include it. It was a somewhat uneventful year, from my
recollection.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be a good thing,
I wouldn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a good thing. The only
thing I really recall happened of significance out of the
ordinary of our budget stuff is the settlement of the
insurance case was that year, which is a good thing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Other than that, I don't think
we -- I mean, nothing very extraordinary happened, which is
good, 'cause the prior couple of years, we had lots of
extraordinary things from --
JUDGE TINLEY: But negative.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Negative extraordinary. That
was a positive this time.
s-Z~-os
127
1
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: Commissioner 4?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Nothing. I'll be quiet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. It is now --
MS. HARGIS: Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Are you stretching?
MR. WHATLEY: I just had a question, if I might.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does it deal with an agenda item?
MR. WHATLEY: Yes. I got here late, and I'm sorry;
I just found out about it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. WHATLEY: Live Springs Ranch, that agenda item.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. We held a public hearing with
regard to the -- no, that was not a public hearing. That
dealt with a concept plan and then a -- a variance request.
Concept plan, no formal action was taken since it was a
concept plan. The variance request was approved.
MR. WHATLEY: If I might make a comment on it? Or
is it too late?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I -- the agenda item's been
called and is done, over, saucered, Mowed and gone.
MR. WHATLEY: It's just the homeowners -- the
property owners out there have not been notified there was
going to be a hearing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There will be -- there will be
5-27-08
128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There hasn't been a hearing.
MR. WHATLEY: Oh, it's just -- nothing now?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Y'all will be -- there will be
a revision -- I understand from the concept, there will be a
revision of plat, and there will be a public hearing on that
I when they provide notice for it.
MR. WHATLEY: Excuse me, I didn't know. I just got
a call from Houston telling me.
JUDGE TINLEY: That would relate to the concept
plan that we took no action on. And they'll present it as a
preliminary plat proposal at some point down the road.
MR. WHATLEY: Okay, then we're early. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
MS. HARGIS: Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any reports from elected officials?
MS. HARGIS: I'm not an elected official.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going to get to department heads
in just a minute.
MS. HARGIS: All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Reports from department
23 heads?
24
25 that?
5-27-08
MS. HARGIS: Why did I know you were going to do
129
1
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: Got her.
MS. HARGIS: I should have just gone over to the
side. The -- we did send out an e-mail this morning
notifying everyone that the budget process -- to play with
the budget process will be through the end of this week, to
continue changing their -- or looking at how to do it. We
will open the real budget on Monday, the 2nd, and they will
have until the 16th to put their budgets in so that we can
reach the time frame that the Judge has for us, so that you
can have the opportunity with the computers and so forth to
make your changes. So, they have approximately two weeks to
start their budgets and complete them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When do we get our computers?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait just a second.
MS. HARGIS: They're here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Run that -- run those
statements by us one more time, now?
MS. HARGIS: June -- the rest of this week, they
have the opportunity to continue training themselves on their
computers.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: Okay? Which they have had now for the
whole month. Those who have not been hooked up to the
computers and are having problems, are remotely located,
we're going to work with them separately. They're welcome to
5-27-08
130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
come in our office and do them, or we'll go out in the field
and work with them with paper and pencil. Then we will
actually load what will be the new budget --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's stay on that other
topic just for a second. The Extension Service, people that
are not Incoded, you have -- you're going to have an extra
computer in your office for people like them to come to to
load their budget into, right?
MS. HARGIS: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we encourage them to
please come do that? Or --
MS. HARGIS: Yes, we did in the e-mail, and we've
already talked to them. Roy came back to see me. We would
very much like to get him on a separate computer. John is
working on that, but it may not be done for this year. But
we're going to try to get him online so that he has the
availability to be able to see the budget year-round, which
is a tool that we want them to have. Part of being online
with this tool and giving everyone the opportunity to view it
and to input their own budgets through the computer is not
just for this time frame; it's for the whole 12 months. So,
you know, it becomes their tool to use as management for --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you saying -- tell me
about this extra. We may -- we're wanting him to -- Roy to
have one out at his office?
5-27-08
131
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARGIS: We're going to see if he can be
remotely connected to our server.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That may not happen till
next year, so you're going to have the extra one in your
office this year?
MS. HARGIS: The extra computer is located in my
office now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Okay, that's -- okay.
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I wasn't real clear.
MS. HARGIS: The extra computer is located in my
office now. We still have some problems getting some of the
folks who are in outlying areas -- for instance, Animal
Control is still not hooked up yet. I don't think Road and
Bridge is hooked up yet. And part of this is waiting on --
they're waiting on the line to be hooked up for them, but
they will get on this year too. Roy's situation is a little
different. He -- as is Adult Probation, because they have
their own computer systems. Roy is on the A & M system, so
he's not even on our system, so that makes it a little hard,
but we're trying to figure out a way to get him on, either
through his computer system, or we may have to give him --
you know, or he may have to ask for another computer from
A & M that we can put our system on.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why can't he drive over
here, walk into her office and sit down and enter the stuff
5-27-08
132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in that extra computer?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what he's going to have to do
this year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the difference in
that and purchasing another computer and putting it -- I
mean, I don't get it. I don't see what the big deal is,
walking in her office and doing it.
MS. HARGIS: He can do it that way. The difference
to him is managing his budget on a daily basis throughout the
year. It would be nice for him to be able to do that,
because then he would not have to call us. When he's going
on trips and when he's planning on all of these stock shows,
he -- he has to come in almost every other day to check and
make sure that, you know, he's in line and he's -- and --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true.
MS. HARGIS: Part of the problem is the traveling,
the gasoline situation with him and so forth. So, we just
felt that it would be nice for him to have that tool to be
able to print his own reports possibly to give A & M, without
having to go through us and so forth. Again, this is not a
short-term tool. This is something that they will have to
work with all year, and that's one of the reasons why I think
they'll find it very advantageous. The first time will be a
little cumbersome, but after that, they'll get used to using
it during the year, as well as you will be able to pull it up
5-27-08
133
1
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 see if a department is in line. I think that would be
really great for Bruce, because of him having several
departments under him, and being able to review that if he
needs to, and to meet with them to be able to pull it up.
~I COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this week -- they're
still finishing up the training?
MS. HARGIS: They -- yeah, they're practicing on
theirs. And, so, you know, we may have to help some
departments, which we're more -- you know, Ken can go one way
and I can go another, and we'll do it. We'll help as many
people as we can.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, if you're going to load
the documents for the next budget year -- next week? Is that
what you said?
MS. HARGIS: They will be on Monday morning.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How are you going to
facilitate training for these five individuals?
MS. HARGIS: We'll still be able to train y'all
with the budget being up, because you're going to see the
whole system, and we can still go into that training modular
for you. But, you know, we're just going to turn it on --
and we can turn it on based on your name. That's the way we
have it set up. So, we'll -- we'll -- when we train you, we
will turn it on so that y'all can be trained by -- through
the training module which we set up a special budget to use
5-27-08
134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
just to train, and so we'll still be able to help y'all with
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
MS. HARGIS: And your computers are here, because
the invoice is on my desk.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The computers are here.
They've been here for 10 days, so --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ten days?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A week. Been here a week,
and we don't have them yet. So, I've gotten tired of going
down there beating on him, and I was following the Judge down
there, I understand. So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When's the wiring --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- y'all take turns and go
get him.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When's the wiring going to
take place?
MS. HARGIS: I just know the computers are here
because of the invoice. I don't know anything about the
wiring.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What was the date?
MS. GRINSTEAD: I thought they started today.
Later today? And it's going to take -- I thought he said,
like, two weeks.
MR. BOLLIER: They said -- I know he said today.
5-27-08
135
1
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: I think you're talking -- you
may be talking about the -- the court teleconferencing and
security stuff. That's supposed to be starting. Not --
their deal is totally different.
MS. GRINSTEAD: No, but I think John said he was
going to try and have them do it at the same time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do them at the same time.
MS. GRINSTEAD: That's what John said.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
MS. HARGIS: Any more questions?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other department heads? Okay.
It is now 12:13, and we will go out of public or open session
to go into executive session to consider the remaining items
on our agenda.
(The open session was closed at 12:13 p.m., and an
executive session was held, the transcript of which
is contained in a separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to into open
or public session. It is 1:14. Does any member of the Court
have anything to offer in connection with matters discussed
in executive session?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can do 20 and 21.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's see. All right. Let
me do 20. I move that we authorize Ms. Hyde to advertise
5-27-08
136
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
internally for the position of Court Compliance Department
head, and -- excuse me?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Clerk -- or I guess it is a
department head, I'm sorry. Didn't mean to interrupt you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, department head. And
I understand that we'd offer the salary of 16.1, whatever
that is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? Does that
include review?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, it does.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 90-day review.
JUDGE TINLEY: 90-day review, all right. 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.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Hyde had her hand up.
MS. HYDE: I have a little question. They stay
where they're at? Whoever gets the position would stay where
they're at with no loss, right?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right.
5-27-08
137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HYDE: And then, at the end of 90 days, is that
when they to go 16-1? After passing the review? I just want
to make sure, if I talk to anybody, that I'm at least talking
to them right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Correct.
I
MS. HYDE: He's looking at me real strange.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Isn't that what we said?
JUDGE TINLEY: Was that your motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, that's what we
agreed to.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Are you going to -- are you
going to pay them as a 16-1 initially, with a review after
90, or are you going to bring them on at wherever they are,
with --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My desire is to bring them
on at 16-1.
MS. HYDE: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Offer them a 16-1, and then
after the 90-day review, we'll talk about where we go --
present salary, et cetera.
MS. HYDE: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Everybody clearly understand
I' the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, I understand it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
5-27-08
138
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But --
JUDGE TINLEY: You do not have to like it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You don't have to like it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- but under that motion,
what if there's -- at the end of 90 days, does this person go
back to where they were? Or just gone?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. In my mind, they're
going to go to the present salary.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, but what if we -- what if
the person isn't working out? What happens to the person
after 90 days?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe they go with the City.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So, they're -- so the
spot they're coming from in the county, that spot's no longer
available to them?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. I run this
department; I don't run those others.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought we were talking
about a lateral transfer with a 90-day review, potential to
go to 16-1. I thought that's what we were talking about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I like that better, personally,
but that wasn't the motion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, I know it wasn't the
I motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to take what I can
5-27-08
139
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
get out of this thing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ
is there?
So, there's not a second yet,
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't think it's a bad idea
to go to a 16-1 to begin with, because I don't believe you're
going to get somebody to agree to work in that department at
a lesser -- a lesser step and grade.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No lesser. So, the --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You tell them 16-1 after 90
j days.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- lateral for 90 days.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Tough.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The motion is they come on at
a 16-1, probationary review in 90 days, and anything's
possible at that point?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: All options are open.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right. I can't tell
you what's going to happen at the end of 90 days.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay, that's the motion.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll second your motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a second. Question or
discussion on that motion?
5-27-08
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
140
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, in your mind, is there a
likelihood of an increase after a 16-1? To me, 16-1 --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: After 90 days?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If I were going to -- if I
had the opportunity to vote on that today, I would probably
vote to take that person to whatever the salary is today, as
the head of that department.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Which is much greater than
what this is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You asked me what was in my
mind, and that's what's in my mind.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Other questions or discussion? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Oehler voted
in favor of the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(Commissioner Letz voted against the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Did you vote?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I did.
JUDGE TINLEY: You voted for?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, that motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We have our first split vote
5-27-08
141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in a while.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's go back and do it
again, see what the Judge does.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Think Buzzie's, and get
along at lunch.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't -- yeah, Buzzie's
is open today, isn't it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other -- any other action
to be offered?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Item 21.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we transfer
Eddie North from the Environmental Health Department to the
Court Compliance Department, to continue his working
arrangement, two days a week or something. I can't -- I'm
really not sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At existing salary?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Existing salary.
~ Existing --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Same level. Same step and
grade.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Same number of hours, et
5-27-08
142
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
cetera.
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: That motion does carry. Any other
motions to be offered with regard to matters considered in
executive session?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we
transfer the duties of -- for elections from the County
Clerk's office to the Tax Assessor's office, effective
immediately, with the assurance about to be stated publicly
from the County Clerk that she will assist through this
complete election cycle to make sure we have a smooth
transition.
MS. PIEPER: Gentlemen, I will make that verbal
commitment to assist them in all aspects of the election
through the end of the November election cycle.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion on that motion? All in
favor of that motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
s-2~-oa
143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Any other
action to be offered?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we need to do another --
another motion related to that on transferring an employee?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think you probably do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we
transfer Nadene Alford from the County Clerk's office to the
Tax Assessor's -- or to the Tax Assessor's office at a 17-12.
Isn't that right? Isn't that --
MS. PIEPER: Yeah. She's shaking her head yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that's for the purpose of --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Of heading up --
JUDGE TINLEY: Elections Administration department.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, working Elections
Administration department.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion and a second
as indicated. Question or discussion on that motion?
MS. HYDE: Is that a different one?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, the second --
different motion.
MS. HYDE: A different motion.
5-27-08
144
1
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: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's to deal only with
transferring Nadene.
MS. HYDE: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion also carried. Any other
motions to be offered in connection with matters considered
in executive session? Any other business on this particular
agenda?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, what about the Item
1? Did -- just seeing this lady walk in made me think, did
Ms. Shelby ever come --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That wasn't her, was it?
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know. I'm certainly not
aware of --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- to talk about the dog
park? That is a dog park. You guys get it in your head,
that's what it is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only in the minds of a
select few.
5-27-08
145
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's what it is;
it's a dog park.
JUDGE TINLEY: If I see her, I'll send her down to
Buzzie's. We stand adjourned.
(Discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me rescind my declaration of
we're adjourned.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I make a motion that we adjust
the step and grade for Michelle to a --
MS. HYDE: 17-1.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- 17-1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion? That's because she's
working with the Elections Department?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. For the -- and
realigning the Elections Department and functions that go
with that department, which is transferring.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion carried. Now,
5-27-08
146
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
gentlemen, this is your last chance.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm gone.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm out of here.
JUDGE TINLEY: We stand adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 1:25 p.m.)
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 30th day of May, 2008.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
B Y : ___ ~~G~ -----
Kath~~ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
5-27-08
ORDER NO. 30847
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF UTILIZING ANNUAL LICENSE RENEWAL
FEES TO TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Modify the first Resolved to be funds from the annual hunting license renewal fees
and on the second line to be funds from the annual hunting license renewal fees to
Texas Parks and Wildlife for predator control.
ORDER NO. 30848
REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR MEDICAL SERVICES TO
INMATES AT KERB COUNTY JAIL
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Authorize the Sheriff to solicit Requests for Qualifications to provide medical
services to inmates at the Kerr County Jail, and this is to be exempt from bidding
pursuant to Section 262.024.
ORDER NO. 30849
OPEN BIDS FOR 4,400 SQUARE FEET OF CONCRETE FOR STORAGE
AREA AT KERR COUNTY FAIR GROUNDS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Open bids for the 4,400 sq. ft. of concrete for storage area at the Kerr County
Fairgrounds from:
1. Freed and Barker Concrete on the Ag Barn Foundation Project, total
job price - $15,793
2. Montgomery Construction - 1 bid submitted for all 3 of the concrete
items, 4,400 square feet - $16,370
3. Thomas Mall Concrete - $25,800
4. Jim Bitner, Bitner Supply - $22,386.78, materials and labor
5. Schwarz Construction Company - $22,525
And move we accept all bids and refer them to the Maintenance Director for
recommendation.
ORDER NO. 30850
OPEN BIDS FOR 648 SQUARE FEET OF CONCRETE SIDEWALK AT THE
KERB COUNTY COURTHOUSE
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioners Williams/Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Open bids for the 648 sq. ft. of concrete sidewalk at the Kerr County Courthouse
from:
1. Montgomery Construction on removal and replacement of the
sidewalk - $6,485
There is an add on for granite and curb (if needed) 600 sq. ft. - $2,850
This Bid was a composite for all projects - $29,145, but which did not
include granite and curbs
2. Freed and Barker - $8,940
3. Thomas Mall Concrete - $8,850
4. Schwarz Construction - $14,310
And move we accept all bids and refer to Maintenance Director for
recommendation.
ORDER NO. 30851
OPEN BIDS FOR AIR CONDITIONING UNITS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Open bids for one 6-ton air conditioning unit and four 8-1 /2 ton air conditioning
units from:
1. Trademark -Option 1 -Based on a 10 SEER unit, R-22, for 3 8-1/2
ton roof top units and two 6 ton package units - $31,500
Option 2 - a 13 SEER Puron unit, three 8-1 /2 ton package units on
roof top and two 6 ton air conditioning package units - $53,750
2. Hardin Heating and Cooling - 2 Carrier 6 ton units and 3 Carrier 8-
1/2 ton package units for a total of $26,621
And move we accept all air conditioning bids and refer to Maintenance Director
for recommendation.
ORDER NO.30852
OPEN BIDS FOR C7500 TRUCK EQUIPPED WITH AERIAL BUCKET AND
CHIP BOX
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Open bids for a C-7500 truck equipped with an aerial bucket and chip box from:
1. Ufleet - $69,900
2. Terex Utilities, Inc. - $65,000
And move we accept all bids and refer to Road & Bridge Administrator for
recommendation.
ORDER NO. 30853
NAME A PRIVATE ROAD
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Name a private road Target Hill Road (off of highway 27 by Wilson Creek near
Dove Valley), located in Precinct 2.
ORDER NO. 30854
FINAL PLAT OF HEADWATERS RANCH, PHASE 3
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioners Baldwin/Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the final plat of Headwaters Ranch, Phase 3, located in Precinct 4.
ORDER NO. 30855
ACTUARIAL SERVICES FOR GASB 45 WITH GABRIEL ROEDER SMITH &
COMPANY AND INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH NORTH CENTRAL
TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Move approval to require the Actuarial Services for GASB 45 with Gabriel Roeder
Smith & Company and include the Interlocal Agreement with North Central Texas
Council of Governments, and authorize County Judge to sign same, with the funds
to come from the Professional Services line item, subject to the review by the
County Attorney.
ORDER NO.30856
VARIANCE TO POSTPONE CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS TO
CHISOIM TRAIL AND PORTIONS OF SEDALIA TRAIL IN LIVE SPRINGS
RANCH
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Grant a variance from the road specifications to widen the road at this point, based
on the revised plat, and that a traffic count be done by Kerr County at the entrance
of the subdivision annually, whenever they deem necessary, and that within 2 years
of the traffic count reaching 800, the road will be upgraded.
ORDER NO. 30857
GOVDEALS INC. SERVICES
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Move that we enter into an Agreement with GovDeals, Inc., an Internet based
auction service for a system to dispose of surplus items by the County, and one for
seized property also.
ORDER NO. 30858
MEDICAL INSURANCE LAB CLAIMS AGAINST OUR INSURANCE
POLICY
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Permit reimbursement by employees who were charged a deductible for laboratory
services as a result of office visits through May 31, 2008, and commencing June 1,
2008 that our schedule of benefits be changed to provide the waiver of deductible
only apply to laboratory services as a result of the office visit when it is done using
a preferred provided, that being Clinical Pathology Labs, being the only local one.
ORDER NO. 30859
AWARD BID FOR 4,400 SQUARE FEET OF CONCRETE FOR STORAGE
AREA AT KERB COUNTY FAIR GROUNDS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Award bid to Freed and Barker for the 4,400 square feet of concrete for the storage
area at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, Kerr County Fairgrounds, in the
amount of $15,793.
ORDER NO.30860
AWARD BID FOR 648 SQUARE FEET OF CONCRETE SIDEWALK AT THE
KERB COUNTY COURTHOUSE
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Award the bid for 648 square feet of concrete sidewalk at the Kerr County
Courthouse, being the removal and replacement of the existing sidewalk, to
Thomas Mall Concrete in the amount of $8,850, and if there is a reason to be
uncomfortable with that bid, and we are not comfortable that they can do the work,
then the 2"d bid is Freed & Barker at $8,940.
ORDER NO. 30861
AWARD BID FOR C7500 TRUCK EQUIPPED WITH AN AERIAL BUCKET
AND CHIP BOX
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Upon recommendation of the Road & Bridge Administrator, award bid to Ufleet in
the amount of $69,900 for a C7500 Truck equipped with an Aerial Bucket and
Chip Box, as the only proposer that met the specifications of 10,000 miles or less.
ORDER NO. 30862
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, came to be considered by the
Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	131,930.78
14-Fire Protection	$	15,000.00
15-Road & Bridge	$	19,239.24
18-County Law Library	$	1,740.96
28-Records Mgmt & Preservation	$	9,130.47
31-Parks	$	4,430.80
37-Center Point Wastewater	$	185.20
50-Indigent Health Care	$	18,853.47
76-Juv Detention Facility	$	266.73
77-LEOSE Funds	$	600.00
TOTAL
$ 201, 377.65
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz,
the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts.
ORDER NO. 30863
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 the following monthly reports:
JP #2
County Clerk -General and Trust Fund
Constable Pct #3
ORDER NO. 30864
POST INTERNALLY TO FILL POSITION OF DEPARTMENT HEAD FOR
COURT COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 3-1-0 to:
Authorize Ms. Hyde to advertise internally for the position of Court Compliance
Department Head and offer the salary of Grade/Step 16/l, to include a 90 day
review to discuss present salary.
ORDER NO. 30865
TRANSFER ED NORTH FROM ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DEPARTMENT TO COURT COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Transfer Ed North from Environmental Health Department to Court Compliance
Department to continue his working arrangements at his existing salary.
ORDER NO. 30866
TRANSFERS OF ELECTION DUTIES FROM COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE TO
TAX ASSESSOR'S OFFICE
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Transfer the duties of Elections from the County Clerk's Office to the Tax
Assessor's Office effective immediately with the assurance, to be stated publicly,
from the County Clerk that she will assist through this complete election cycle to
ensure a smooth transition.
ORDER NO. 30867
TRANSFER NADENE ALFORD FROM COUNTY CLERK' S OFFICE TO TAX
ASSESSOR'S OFFICE
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams. The Court
unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Transfer Nadene Alford from the County Clerk's Office to the Tax Assessor's
Office at a Grade/Step 17/12 for heading up the Elections Administration
Department.
ORDER NO. 30868
ADJUST SALARY OF MICHELE SCHNEIDER IN ELECTIONS
ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 27th day of May, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin. The Court unanimously
approved by vote of 4-0-0 to:
Adjust the Grade/Step of Michele Schneider to a 17/1 due to working with the
Elections Administration Department.