1
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
Friday, October 3, 2008
1:30 p.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

c.~
Uo
M
O
O
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I N D E X
October 3, 2008
PAGE
1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
adopt a resolution committing to a 25 percent	
match as requested by Texas Water Development	
Board for Chapter 355 Grant for EDAP Facilities	
Planning for Center Point-Eastern Kerr County	
Wastewater Project	3
1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
confirm 2007-08 Budget encumbrances to fund	
cash portion of 25 percent Kerr County match	
as required for Chapter 355 Grant for EDAP	
Facilities Planning for Center Point-Eastern	
Kerr County Wastewater Project	9
1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
authorize the draining of Ingram Lake	12
--- Adjourned	16
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Friday, October 3, 2008, at 1:30 p.m., a special
Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's come to order, if we
have several meetings on -- several items on the agenda.
We'll take up the first one; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to adopt a resolution committing to a
25 percent match as requested by Texas Water Development
Board for a Chapter 355 grant for EDAP facilities planning
for the Center Point/Eastern Kerr County Wastewater Project.
Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I
prepared for members of the Court a memorandum with a couple
attachments, which are kind of significant in this whole
thing. And just to refresh the Court's memory, the
application that is pending for Water Development Board is
for facilities planning, and the total is $358,000. That's
what the application is all about. If that application
stands or is approved at that amount, our requirement, no
matter what the amount, is 25 percent match, but of that 25
10-3-08
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
percent, one-half of it is in cash and one-half of it is
in-kind. So, what I've done is figured up the amount of 385,
25 percent, and 25 percent equates to 96,250, and half is
48,125 each. Now, you'll see in the backup, I've had a
couple of e-mails from some of the folks -- some of the
a look at our resolution to see if there's anything
specifically that was missing or needed to be in there, and
she says, "One comment I wanted to make is that at this
time," -- and this was October 1 -- "we are looking at a
total facilities planning cost of 238." Meaning that they're
looking to seek some reductions in that from 385 down to 238.
Another e-mail came late yesterday afternoon, and
line is that they want to reduce the scope, and also the cost
of the facility plan, essentially trimming out some of the
work, such as surveying, permitting and geo-tech, and pushing
it into the next phase, which is the design phase, thereby
reducing the cost. He's going to have to rework the scope of
work, get a number. Now, for us, that means that the number
could fall somewhere between 385 and the number that Ms. Zuba
gave us of 238. Well, somewhere in between. :3~5 is the
high. 25 percent match of that is, as we indicated, in cash,
10-3-08
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
48,125. If it comes in at the lower number, our match
requirement would be 59,5, and that breakdown of one-half,
and that half is 29,750 each, in-kind versus cash.
So, what I'm asking the Court to do is approve a
resolution based on the application that's filed for 385.
That's the not-to-exceed number, which would be the 48, one
and a quarter for us. And that's what the resolution is all
about, just sweet and simple, that we agree to -- to approve
the match requirement for this particular grant. Now, what
this does is gets us through -- gets us through
environmental, archeological, some more design money, more
assessment of the cost and all this stuff, and gets us up to
the next phase, which is -- which is the actual design of the
construction and so forth.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the reason we are going
from a 10 percent match to a 25 percent match?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The reason is that our
reserves are sufficiently high that we don't qualify for
anything above a 75 percent match. That's the reason.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 75 percent grant.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm sorry, a 75 percent
grant, requiring a 25 percent match. That's the reason why
we're in for 25 percent.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you've got to be a really
25 ~ poor county --
10-3-08
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You have to be an
extraordinarily poor county to get the next level, or -- or
total -- or totally.
~~ COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't believe we qualify.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We don't qualify.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we're just now finding
out that we're rich?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. In case you -- in
case you've been wondering, by T.W.D.B. standards, we're
flush.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't tell Rusty.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Rusty -- well, when he sees
this budget amendment, how we've tapped him out to nothing...
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. Let me ask a
question.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Y'all do that each year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're talking about
trimming out some of the work, such as surveying, permitting,
geo-tech, and pushing it into the next phase, the design
phase. So, we're reducing the number now. We'll be
increasing the number in the design phase?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Quite likely. Why? Only
the Water Development Board knows why.
JUDGE TINLEY: Question. When we get to the design
phase, are we going to -- are we going to be in the same
10-3-08
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
percentage type match, or is there a possibility that more of
the design phase can be included -- be covered by grant
funds?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, my understanding is
that once we get this phase -- this engages the Texas
Department of Health with a finding of need over there. And
if they find, as we think they will because of all the
septics in that area that are out of compliance and are
unsizable and blab, blab, blab, that we could then become
eligible for a higher level of funding, it's going to require
that Texas Department of Health certification of whatever it
is they're going to do.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, it -- probably the worst that
would happen is that our percentage match would remain at --
at 25 percent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: It could possibly become less
percentage than that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It could become less.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, the more we push up to what we
could get a higher grant contribution on, the better off we
are.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the way it looks as
of this setting.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That's what I'm seeing.
10-3-08
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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If we do this, this match
right now of the -- of the 48,125, and it actually costs us
less, do they just credit us, or --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it's our money here.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- do they send it back?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The way they work it,
Commissioner, is you spend your money first.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, if our match is reduced
to anything less than 48,125, we're still spending our
dollars first and their money second. So, it's here. We
just have to commit to it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. We're -- we're
committing. We're not sending them a check today.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, we're just committing.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. I like that a lot
I better.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Making the commitment.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there's no obligation -- if
we get to the next phase, there's no obligation for anything
beyond this. If we -- if they come back and say, "Okay, now
we want -- let's go on with the next phase of this, the
design-build phase," and they say, "and we want it to be a
75/25," we don't have to go along with that. We can just
say --
10-3-08
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can opt out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Every phase stands on its
own.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, with that explanation,
', I would move the resolution that's presented to the Court,
which the Resolved says that the County -- Kerr County
Commissioners Court approves the match requirement for
Chapter 355 grant for EDAP facilities planning for Center
Point/Eastern Kerr County Wastewater Project.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item and the resolution. Question or
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 2; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to
confirm 2007-08 budget encumbrances to fund cash portion of
25 percent Kerr County match as required for Chapter 355
grant for EDAP facilities planning for Center Point/Eastern
Kerr County Wastewater Project. Commissioner Williams?
10-3-08
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I've
asked Ms. Hargis to see if she could figure out where we
could cobble together $48,125 from the recently concluded
budget year and encumber those monies. Jeannie, do you want
to come explain what you've done here?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't you want to wait till
Rusty gets back in here? I like to see him squirm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He's already fainted;
that's why he's in the hall.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's good enough.
MS. HARGIS: We have set up the budget amendment,
as you can see, from several different accounts to come up
with the 48,125, which we will transfer into Fund 37, which
is our Center Point Wastewater Treatment Plant fund that we
set up for that grant to keep it separate.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, all of these would be
encumbered and go into Fund 37, and as we draw down on that
in this particular grant period, it comes out of this first,
and then Water Development Board money comes behind.
MS. HARGIS: That's right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And all of this -- all of
these --
MS. HARGIS: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All of these dollars are on
'08-'09? Or are they some from last year?
10-3-08
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
MS. HARGIS: These are '07-'08 dollars.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say again?
MS. HARGIS: '07-'08, the year we just finished.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All of it?
MS. HARGIS: Yes, because that was -- we received
~' the memo in September. So, --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very good. Okay.
MS. HARGIS: -- this does not apply to the new
~ budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Any questions? I move the
approval -- move approval of the budget amendment as
presented by the Auditor.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the budget amendment as presented in the agenda
item. Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I still don't think you
should take over 50 percent of the Sheriff's salary, though.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Shhhh.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got to do what you got to do,
Buster.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. I'll go along with it
this time.
10-3-08
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We are talking about sewer
here. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whoa.
JUDGE TINLEY: 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.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, gentlemen.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 3; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to authorize the
draining of Ingram Lake. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, you know, last year we
tried to do this, and they got authorization from the Court,
and we tried to pull the plug and broke the cable. So, this
year I got Len involved, and he went and rented the pump last
week and got two divers from up at Hunt to go down; they
uncovered the thing -- the ball, the infamous ball that had
the cable hooked to it, and the hook on the ball is in the
hole. That's why it broke when they tried to pull it. It
didn't -- it's not sticking up. So, we can put a new chain
on it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, my gosh.
10-3-08
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, between some of the Road
and Bridge guys and some other interested parties, we have
devised a method to hook onto that ball very easily and pull
it, if we can get authorization to do so. Needs to be
drained. We need to do a little more evaluation of the dam
and see what's in there. It's been 12 years since it was
drained, and give the landowners a chance to do some cleanup
along their property and do some erosion control at the same
time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Third.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- that we authorize the
~' draining of Ingram Lake.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on the
motion? All in favor of that motion, saying 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: How big is this ball?
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any further business?
10-3-08
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
Any reports from Commissioners in connection with their
liaison or committee assignments? Any reports from elected
officials? Let the record reflect, the Sheriff did not raise
his hand. (Laughter.)
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm trying to give y'all a
good year, Buster.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, I told you there's
still miracles. We have our vehicle. Jody, do you want to
talk about our vehicle?
MS. GRINSTEAD: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No? We got one of the old
Environmental Health jeeps out of the -- dusted the cobwebs
off of it, put some new shoes on it, cleaned it up, slicked
it up, and it goes into service Monday.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the courthouse utility
I vehicle?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Courthouse utility.
Courthouse folks will start driving it Monday. And that
answers the question of liabilities and income tax issues.
JUDGE TINLEY: I.R.S., mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I.R.S.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There shouldn't be -- if it's a
county vehicle, how is there income tax issues?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, instead of people being --
being paid to use their own vehicles.
10-3-08
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
I, COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If they don't use the
vehicle, they don't get paid any more, right?
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the theory.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They won't get paid for use
of their own vehicle.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We probably need to look at our
-- draft some policy, maybe, about that, or --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We do have some policies to
talk about. Not today, but coming soon, yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But something. That way, we
can -- you know, so we don't get caught with the same thing
with the cell phone, that someone didn't hear about it, you
know, they can't get paid any more.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's true. You're
right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We didn't send the right
signal.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we -- that it's in the
policy; everyone's aware of it.
JUDGE TINLEY: If we're going to send out an
e-mail, we can do a telephone notification that we're sending
out an e-mail.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, you need to send it Pony
Express.
10-3-08
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
JUDGE TINLEY: I see. Okay, gentlemen. It's
Friday. Is there any other business to come before us?
We'll be adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 1:47 p.m.)
STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF KERR I
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 3rd day of October,
2008.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY : _ ~~~~ ___ _
Ka~ik, Deputy County Clerk
Y
Certified Shorthand Reporter
10-3-08
ORDER NO. 31034
RESOLUTION COMMITTING TO 25% MATCH AS REQUESTED BY TEXAS
WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Came to be heard this the 13th day of October, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Move the Resolution as presented to the Court, which the Resolved says that the Kerr
County Commissioners' Court approves the match requirement for a Chapter 355 Grant
for EDAP Facilities Planning for the Center Point-Eastern Kerr County Wastewater
Project.
ORDER NO. 31035
CONFIRM 2007-08 BUDGET ENCUMBRANCES TO FUND CASH PORTION OF
25% KERB COUNTY MATCH AS REQUESTED BY TEXAS WATER
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Came to be heard this the 13th day of October, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Move approval of the budget amendment as presented by the Auditor.
ORDER NO. 31036
DRAINING OF INGRAM LAKE
Came to be heard this the 13th day of October, 2008, with a motion made by
Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Letz. The Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Authorize the draining of Ingram Lake.