1
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
Regular Session
Monday, February 9, 2009
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H.A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4
O
6`
N
Q
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
I N D E X
February 9, 2009
Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to open
bids from pharmaceutical providers for Kerr County
Indigent Health program for the balance of 2009
fiscal year and FY 2010; refer bids to Indigent
Health Department for evaluation
Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
provide a "Kerr County - Where the Money Goes"
link to Kerr County website
Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
certification of nonavailability of adequate
space in county-owned buildings, or adequate
funds to lease additional physical facilities,
purchase additional equipment, or pay for
additional utilities for 198th Judicial District
Adult Probation Department
1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to adopt
a joint resolution by and between the Kerrville
City Council and the Kerr County Commissioners
Court supporting use of federal stimulus funds
for Phase 2 of airport taxiway/drainage project
at the airport
1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
report to Commissioners Court of status of
investments under Section 887(b), Probate Code
1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to ask
for permission for Road and Bridge to build new
road and 20-count parking lot for Hill Country
Community M.H.M.R. Crisis Stabilization Unit
6
10
12
17
19
22
23
Announcing a 9-1-1 signage campaign 36
Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to set
a public hearing for revision of plat for Lots
2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2 Subdivision 43
Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
authorize Road and Bridge Administrator to
collaborate with City of Kerrville on sealcoating
project for city streets 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
3
I N D E X (Continued)
February 9, 2009
1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
set a public hearing for 2009-2010 Texas
Community Block Grant Colonia Fund for 5:30 p.m.,
Tuesday, February 24, 2009, in the Commissioners'
Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse 51
Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve one or more of the following joint
resolutions with the City of Kerrville:
Airport water line, TexDOT drainage project,
USDA facility, & lake dredging project
1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
determine whether or not a policy change is
needed in Facilities Use Policy for Hill
Country Youth Exhibit Center to include all
nonprofits listed under the 501 (c) section of
IRS Code
1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action
regarding awarding mass notification system
RFP's
1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
request from Texas Wild Bunch to be added to
the nonprofit list for use of Exhibit Hall at
Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center
1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
annual report, membership appointments, and
revised bylaws for Kerr County Historical
Commission
1.18 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
implementation of the burn ban
1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve use of Center Point Lions Park by
Southwest Tandem Rally, Saturday, April 25, 2009
1.20 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
extend contract for investment advisory services
with Patterson & Associates for one year
57
71
76
87
91
102
107
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
4
I N D E X (Continued)
February 9, 2009
1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
reappoint Kenneth Wood and Donald Oehler to
ESD #1 Board for an additional 2-year term
1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
appoint Vicki Barron as a member of Kerr County
Child Services Board
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
1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
future of floodplain administration (Executive
Session)
1.21 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
Kerr County FMLA policy
--- Adjourned
PAGE
112
113
114
115
116
116
123
171
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 Monday, February 9, 2009, at 9:00 a.m., a regular
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.
~I Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the
Kerr County Commissioners Court posted and scheduled for this
date and time, Monday, February 9th, 2009, at 9 a.m. It is
that time now. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Please stand and join me in a
moment of prayer, and followed by the pledge.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. At this time, if there's
any member of the audience or the public that wishes to be
heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item, this is
your time to let us know what's on your mind. If you wish to
be heard on an agenda item, we'd ask that you wait until that
item is called, and we'd prefer that you fill out a
participation form. Should be some located at the back of
the room. That helps me know that there's someone that
wishes to be heard on that item. But if you -- if you wish
to be heard on an agenda item, when we get to that item and
you haven't filled out a participation form, get my attention
2-9-09
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
in some manner and I'll see that you have the opportunity to
be heard. But right now, if there's anybody that wishes to
be heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item, feel
free to come forward at this time and tell us what's on your
', mind. Seeing no one coming forward, we will move on.
Commissioner Letz, do you have anything for us this morning?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, just -- I was hoping we
were going to get a little bit of rain last night. We got a
very little bit of rain last night, and conditions continue
to be extremely dry. Everyone just needs to be careful.
Fire danger's really high. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I'm pretty much the
same way. We had enough to settle the dust for probably 30
minutes, max, but we did have about 6 feet of wind yesterday.
(Laughter.) And had to -- picked up my dog pen, threw it up
against the high line and broke the meter.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Bet that was exciting.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But hopefully we can get by
with more rain and less wind. That will be fine with me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Your dog wasn't in the dog pen, was
he?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, the dog wasn't in the dog
pen, but she was nearby, and scared her pretty badly. She
went under a wagon wheel. But, anyway, no, we don't have a
2-9-09

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
whole lot. We did have a little fire, and it wasn't -- it
was right on the edge of Kerr -- well, it was actually in
Gillespie County last week that I could see from my house,
and it was in what we call Harper Valley Estates, very, very
back end of it. And I went over to see if they needed any
assistance. Harper was there and Tierra Linda Fire
Department was there, and just didn't seem like they had
quite enough water, so I got ahold of Road and Bridge; they
sent a couple of trucks real quick, and they finished putting
it out. The Forest Service showed up with two bulldozers
real quick, and it was over, thank goodness, but it could
have been pretty bad. But -- so Billy Roeder, I feel like,
owes Kerr County something. It's always good to have him on
that side of it rather than on the other side. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just wanted to amen Roeder
owing us something, the good Commissioner from Gillespie
County. We need to send him a bill. (Laughter.) That's all
I have, Judge. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think what I'm about to
report on falls under this category, 'cause it's not listed
on the agenda, but Commissioner Oehler and I went to a dam
safety conference --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill, you don't have to
2-9-09
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
cuss. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That would be d-a-m-n-e-d.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see, okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Sponsored by
Freese-Nichols, and pretty well attended, and a very --
pretty good presentation. The bottom line is that since we
are the proud owners of three dams in Kerr County that fall
under the T.C.E.Q.'s watchful eye, we have some things to do
over the course of the next two years to come into compliance
with the new state laws and regs regarding dam safety.
Fortunately, we do have a two-year window, but that window
meter started clicking on January 1. But what it boils down
to is that we have some repairs we're going to have to do
over and above what we thought we were going to have to do in
terms of filling in voids underneath the cap in the two dams,
and secondly -- and that's going to require probably our
repairing the lift devices for the plates that cover the --
the big pipes. And I know it's broken in Flat Rock; I don't
know even where it is on Center Point, and it's probably
nonexistent on -- on Commissioner Oehler's at the bottom.
So, that's going to have to be done. But more importantly
than that, even, is that we're going to have to start a -- a
practice of inspecting our dams annually and keeping accurate
records on what we determine and what we're looking for and
what we've -- what our findings are. We can't be piecemeal
z-9-o9
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
about our recordkeeping on the dam safety any more. So,
that's kind of the highlights. Took us the morning to figure
all of that out, and so we got time to get it done.
JUDGE TINLEY: The meter started running on that
this January or next January?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, this January.
JUDGE TINLEY: This January.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any special certification required
for whoever does these inspections and maintains these
records?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not in terms of
maintenance. I don't believe there's any -- any
certifications required. Were there, Bruce? II
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, just a matter of you have
to determine what your -- what problems may exist, and -- and
then what you're going to do to fix them. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- you got to have some kind
of a plan, too, if the thing is -- happens to wash away or
whatever, and people downstream, how that would affect them.
And it's not going to be real easy to comply with; it's going,
to be fairly expense, unfortunately. Another unfunded
I mandate.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we need engineering
z-9-o9
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
help, then, obviously, we're going to have engineering help,
and we probably will in terms of fixing some of those gates
and stuff like that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The old method of just figure
out what's wrong and fix it yourself is not going to be in
compliance, I don't think, any more.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. That's it. We'll talk
about it at budget time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Baldwin, if we
send Commissioner Roeder a bill, I'm going to recommend that
we send you over there to collect it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but it's Bruce's
neighbor. He's not my neighbor.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it was your idea to send him a
I bill .
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Well --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, he is too your
neighbor. Isn't he over in the Tierra Linda area?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't speak English any
more. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We're getting nowhere
there. Okay, let's get on with our agenda. The first item
is to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to open
bids from pharmaceutical providers for Kerr County Indigent
Health program for the balance of 2009 fiscal year and F.Y.
2-9-09
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
2010, refer bids to Indigent Health Department for
evaluation. Let the young man with the sharp knife here work
on them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: May not be sharp.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I have one that's sharp.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sharp enough to hurt me, and I'm
better off without a knife. The first bid that we have is
the Medicine Stop. The next one is from Ackman Pharmacy.
Okay, and I don't know who this last one is from.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: H.E.B.
JUDGE TINLEY: H.E.B.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Got a big enough clip for
that?
JUDGE TINLEY: I do, as a matter of fact. Do I
hear a motion that these bids be accepted and referred to
Indigent Health for evaluation and recommendation?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 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.
I
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12
Kerr County web site which details expenditure of Kerr County
funds, excluding payroll and payroll- and benefits-related
items. I put this on the agenda. I'd be happy to take
credit for the idea, but, unfortunately, a former Republican
county chair inquired of me if we might be able to do that
after attending Comptroller Comb's presentation here in
Kerrville. So, I talked with John Trolinger, our I.T.
Manager, about putting on the agenda the bills that we
approve each meeting, merely putting that on the web site and
letting folks know what they're paying for. He said it would
be relatively easy to do. We put a link on the web site, and
once they're finally approved, those that are finally
approved, they go onto the web site so that folks can see
that, with an explanatory note that if a citizen has
questions about them, any one of them, they can call the
particular department head or elected official that -- under
whose jurisdiction that expenditure falls, or the Treasurer
or the Auditor, and maybe as a last resort, a member of the
Commissioners Court. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you talking -- are you
talking about more -- anything other than the bills? Are you
talking about just the bills that we pay?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, at this point, just the bills
2-9-09
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
It's my understanding that there is some -- the
that, if enacted, would require us to have this information
available in all sorts of different formats, where they can
pull up all the pencils in the county or all the -- all of
the telephone bills in the county, or where we'd have to go
to considerable length to massage the information in order to
make it available in accordance with this proposed
legislation. Right now, what I'm talking about is this --
this listing that we get every meeting for bills, those that
are approved for payment. Once that occurs, that it goes
onto the web site indicating that those bills were approved
for payment by the Court. The -- the payroll information
will not be included there, because that's included in the
position schedule, which is part of the budget and is already
part of public record. The insurance things we've got to be
a little careful about because of HIPAA and confidentiality.
The -- those type of things we've got to be careful about.
But these are the regular vendor-type bills, vendor, and I
think direct payables also would be included on these.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I like it. I think it's a
good -- good open government.
JUDGE TINLEY: Transparency.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Transparency is the latest
buzzword. I wouldn't want the bills like the thing that
2-9-09
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
we're fixing to send to the Commissioner in Gillespie County
for putting out his fire, I wouldn't want that to be out in
the public domain, 'cause that gets kind of heavy. But the
bills that we pay, I'm -- I think is a good idea.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's once they're approved for
payment here, those that are approved for payment would be
the ones that are then placed on the web site, indicating
that they were approved. For example, I don't know when the
Court would want to start, March the lst or whenever, but
indicating that those particular bills were approved for
payment by Commissioners Court on whatever date they were
approved. That's not real complicated, according to the I.T.
Manager.
MR. TROLINGER: And, Judge Tinley, to clarify, the
legislation requires a database, a -- that is a searchable
database of all the county's bills be available, provided by
counties population 20,000 or greater, so that's an extensive
amount of work. But your list, just to provide the summary,
the one-line summary of each bill, is -- I think it's good
faith in what the Legislature wants to provide that
information.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's transparency. And that way, if
-- if a citizen does have a question about a particular item
because there's not adequate explanation, they can call the
elected official or department head and get the information.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
15
It's pretty simple.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I think the only -- I
think it's a great idea. The only thing -- I think we need
to put on the front of it or somewhere a list of what
department head or elected official is responsible for those
bills. Because if you read our bills, some of them are
pretty clear. Some of them you'd have no idea, when you get
into some of these funds toward the back, you know, as to
who's -- like, for example, the -- some of the court records
funds. I mean, it doesn't say on our bill list who's
responsible for that. We obviously want to put Linda Uecker
down for all those. Hi, Linda. How are you doing this
~ morning?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think we could work up --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- as part of the explanatory
addendum a little list by fund. All of the --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Bills by department.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, by fund.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're shown by department. For
example, the County Clerk, that's obviously self-explanatory.
My office is self-explanatory. The District Clerk is
self-explanatory. But on some of the others, they're not
that clear.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
16
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: But we could work that up, and that
would be simple enough to do, I would think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that would make it easier.
I think the thing we -- my thought would be we'd want the
questions to go to the department that knows -- has the
answers, rather than have them all go to the Treasurer and
the Auditor. And if we don't have it clearly broken out, I
think we can go to those two.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ready for a motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just got it. Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. When do you want to try and
start this, March 1?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is March 1 doable, John?
MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: March 1.
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.)
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
17
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go to
Item 4, consider, discuss, and -- excuse me, Item 3. I was
misreading that at 9:30. It's 9:15. Consider, discuss, and
take appropriate action on certification of nonavailability
of adequate space in county-owned buildings or adequate funds
to lease additional physical facilities, purchase additional
equipments, or pay for additional utilities by the department
for the 198th Judicial District Adult Probation Department.
This was placed on the agenda at the request of the Adult
Probation folks, and essentially what we are required to do
is, in the event we are not providing facilities and
equipment and utilities and so forth in order for the
Probation Department to be able to expend their operational
funds on these types of things, this Court must certify that
we don't have that in the county courthouse, or other space
which we have -- own or have leased, and secondly, that we do
not have the funds available to -- to either purchase the
property or lease the property, or to purchase the equipment
needed or the -- or the utilities that are required for the
operation of that office. Is that pretty much it in a
nutshell?
MR. FINN: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which we have not been
doing that over all these years; is that correct?
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
18
MR. FINN: In the last five years, we had a letter
from the County Judge and that was adequate, but now CJAD is
requiring us to have it on Commissioners Court meeting notes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then these funds come --
are paid by --
MR. FINN: By us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Out of -- where does the money
come from?
MR. FINN: It comes from our basic supervision
funds, from probation fees. So -- and in my other four
counties, you know, we have -- we're using the courthouse.
And this is a little different, 'cause you have the 198th and
216th split. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are these -- do these funds go
through the county?
MR. FINN: No, sir. We're -- we're independent
from anything with the county. It's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How -- the reason I'm thinking
of this is 'cause we just did something here about
transparency. How does the public see where you're spending
your money?
', MR. FINN: Usually once a year, we'll have, you
know, just open -- an open meeting. And, you know, nobody
ever shows up to it, but we have it, you know. If anybody
wants to see our budget, you know, it's open to anybody.
2-9-09
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
JUDGE TINLEY: We certainly have no funds in our
budget approved for this purpose, and don't have funds
available to do any of these things, so essentially what we
need is a certification by the Court that -- the statement on
the agenda item of the nonavailability of the space or the
funds to provide the space for those other items.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that your phone?
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think so, no.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are those the kind of
questions we're able to ask?
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: The motion does carry. Thank you,
sir.
MR. FINN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now we'll move to Item 4; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to adopt a joint
resolution by and between the City Council of the City of
2-9-09
20
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
Kerrville and the Kerr County Commissioners Court supporting
use of federal stimulus funds for Phase 2 of the airport
taxiway/drainage project at the Kerrville/Kerr County
Municipal Airport. I put this on the agenda. The City of
Kerrville and Kerr County, of course, jointly own the
airport, and it's under the jurisdiction of the -- the joint
airport board, but we presently have underway Phase 1 of that
taxiway relocation and -- and drainage project. Phase 2 is
coming up pretty quick. It's estimated to be about an
$8 million project, for which there will be a required
IO percent match from -- or portion from City and County.
That's about $800,000. The City wants to see if we can get
stimulus funds for this. If we can get stimulus funds, so
much the better, I would think.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are we talking about
stimulus funds for the match amount of 800 -- 400,000 for
each entity, or are we talking about the $8 million?
JUDGE TINLEY: No, we're talking about just the
portion that we're obligated to pay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: The City/County portion of 800,000,
approximately.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought so.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The other portion is already
funded, correct? Or not?
2-9-09
21
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: Well, it's committed by TexDOT as
Phase 2 of that project. They cut it up into two pieces.
It's a $14 million project. So --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We just had this, remember,
when we went through our list as one of the projects.
JUDGE TINLEY: We got some more later we'll get to,
as I'm sure everybody's aware.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on the
motion? All in favor of the motion --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Question. Are we going to do
-- and this is a little bit of a general question. Rex
probably can't answer it. Are we doing resolutions on all
the ones that we are going to do?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Later.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're all in here? All of
them are separate?
JUDGE TINLEY: There are some later, yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion
on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
z-9-o9
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
(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 5, if we might; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on report to Commissioners Court of the
status of investments under Section 887 (b) of the Probate
Code. Ms. Pieper?
THE CLERK: Judge, she's not here today, but these
are just annual reports that are due by March 1st, and they
need to be accepted by the Commissioners Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a housekeeping measure for
the most part that we've approved every year, as I recall.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that correct?
THE CLERK: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. 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 go to
2-9-09
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
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Good morning.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let me -- let me prelim this, if I
thing that happened in early 2005 is that the civil
commitment beds that we had at Kerrville State Hospital were
-- were converted to what they call forensic beds, which
meant that we -- we would have no place to send our acute
civil commitment patients from Kerr County. Representative
Hilderbran was able to get interim use of some of those beds
pending the ability to get a crisis stabilization unit for
civil commitment type patients working out there at the
Kerrville State Hospital. That has -- in consideration of
having the availability of civil commitment beds to Kerr
County, which has a lot of ramifications if we don't have
those beds, as I'm sure the Sheriff will attest, as he runs
these people all over the countryside if we don't have a
place for them here, they had asked if -- the Hill Country
Community M.H.M.R. had asked if Kerr County would consider
doing its part by putting in a roadway to the facility that
they intended to renovate and use for the crisis
2-9-09
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I6
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
stabilization unit towards the back of the Kerrville State
Hospital campus. The original thought was to go down what's
known as Texas Drive around the pond that's back there, and I
believe at that point in time, the estimate by Mr. Odom was
approximately $12,000, as I recall, to do that project.
That's my recollection, Leonard.
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's been a lot of water under
the bridge since then. And the Court indicated that that
would be appropriate for us to do in consideration of our
having the availability of those civil commitment beds for
Kerr County patients. Leonard now tells me that they've
changed the route to come into that crisis stabilization
unit, which is scheduled to open in April, I believe.
MR. ODOM: That's what they told me.
JUDGE TINLEY: They've been doing a lot of work out
there. The Legislature appropriated somewhere in the
neighborhood of a million bucks to renovate that place, and
it's getting close to ready. But the current plan is to come
in off of Sheppard Rees, which Leonard has indicated is -- is
a shorter route. So, I'll leave it with you now, Leonard.
MR. ODOM: Yeah, that location is up by the
maintenance building there on the Sheppard Rees side, and
swinging around and coming through a gate, and they're
wanting now a 20-count parking lot that would tie into the
2-9-09
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
I7
I8
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
bottom down there by the structure. What I need from the
Court is permission to do that, and that I can move forward
to -- to do -- we don't have a problem; we can work it in to
make it -- make it happen, but I need your authorization.
And my question would be -- is the dollars. I don't know
where I would be able -- what line item we could come off of
to pay for the material. But it's a shorter route; it's
probably better. It's between that maintenance building and
the cemetery, and they have a gate right there, and they can
secure that. It's secure to basically keep people from
'I coming in and out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to ask the same
question I asked last time when we talked about this in 2005,
I think. We're building a road for the State, and they want
us to pay for it as well?
MR. ODOM: Not that I know of. I think there's
funds allocated for this, I would assume, because I did not
budget anything into this year's budget.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, how do we pay for it,
then? I mean
MR. ODOM: Well, that's my question. I didn't
write that down, but what line item for dollars will we cost
to? So, I don't know. Maybe the Judge would have an idea.
Somebody implied to me there was 30,000-some-odd dollars, one
of the young men. And my question to him was, you know,
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
where's the money to pay for the material, the cost of the
asphalt and the rock and any base material or black base that
we might use?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would think that whoever
you're building a road for would provide the material, and
then you provide the -- the County provide the manpower and
the building of it. That's the way I would think through it.
But -- so we're -- so the taxpayers are to pay for the
material too?
MR. ODOM: Sir, I -- Road and Bridge is not paying
for it, I'll tell you that right now. Road and Bridge is not
paying for it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Not coming out of your budget?
MR. ODOM: Not coming out of my budget, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, my understanding was
that our contribution to that total effort to have civil
commitment beds available to us would be that we would put in
the road, and that implied to me that whatever materials were
required, we would -- we would front those also.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- so, our payoff is --
that may be a bad choice of words, but that's the way it is.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the reality of it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Our payoff is that
they're going to house our patients from Kerr County?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
2-9-09
27
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We build a road, then they
house our patients. Is that the trade?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, somebody needs to
know that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. The premise -- the problem
arose when they -- when they took our civil commitment beds.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that.
JUDGE TINLEY: And made them forensic, which meant
that our -- our local citizens that required mental health
services were going to have to be transported who knows
where; Big Spring, El Paso, San Antonio, Austin. I don't
know where all Rusty's transported these folks, but he's had
guys running up and down the road pretty good, and it -- it
has taken him a lot of manpower and a lot of time and fuel
to take these people where they needed to go on occasion,
when they're on diversion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What were you planning on
doing if the road -- the one that we approved in '05, did you
build that?
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
MR. ODOM: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. What were -- who was
going to pay for the material then?
MR. ODOM: My understanding was that that funds was
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
going to come from them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. ODOM: And that's the way my -- it was a cost
estimate that I thought at that time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. ODOM: To put it in.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm not opposed to
either way. I just -- I just think that we need to know.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: Well, that's --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Weden?
MR. WEDEN: Yes?
JUDGE TINLEY: Are there any funds available in the
Crisis Stabilization Unit construction program for anything
in connection with this road?
MR. WEDEN: The funds that the State appropriated
are all towards -- have all gone towards renovation of the
building, the facility itself. Once the facility opens in
April, it will create 38 new positions here in Kerr County,
with an average annual salary base of another $1.6 million,
so that should be bringing some additional tax revenue and
other things into the county.
JUDGE TINLEY: But the understanding --
MR. WEDEN: One of the things --
2-9-09
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: -- when we started talking about
this thing in the very beginning, back in '05, when they --
when they snagged all the civil commitment beds for forensic
beds, was that this would be Kerr County's contribution to
have initial civil commitment beds available.
MR. WEDEN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard, what's the estimated
cost now? What are we looking at? You said 12,000 was the
old number, and with the change in the road now and adding a
parking lot --
MR. ODOM: I'm going to say below 20,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you building a road or
reconstructing something that exists?
MR. ODOM: I'm basically building a road, or
', constructing part of their -- their drive area. And, you
know, the parking lot was something else that -- to try to
get it in. I just found out it was April; I was a little bit
shocked, the -- the timeline that I had. But we were
thinking black base. That's the reason I say it may go up
for base. Maybe it's less than that. You know, maybe
$12,000 may work. It's a whole lot shorter; it's half the
distance, is the reason we looked at it to come up with this
thing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Had you always thought you
a-a-o9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
30
would have to construct the parking lot? That was always in
the mix?
MR. ODOM: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
MR. ODOM: No, the original discussion with me was,
"What do you think it would do if you went this route here?"
We looked at it, and then we discussed it maybe 30 days ago,
of rerouting this to make it shorter, to get it out of the
water. We felt like it was more -- more feasible off
Sheppard Rees up there. That's -- you know, I'm not in that
pay scale to make that decision for the Court. I -- I would
assume that --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd argue that point.
(Laughter.)
MR. ODOM: Well, I -- for me to do that -- I can
make a decision real quick, but I don't have any guidelines
where this money's at, or I would have budgeted for it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just want to know who's
going to pay for it.
~ MR. ODOM: To my thought, it was --
~, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, if we authorize
Ii this thing today, that, to me, is authorizing you to build
it. Doesn't say anything about money.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you know, we're going to
z-9-oa
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
have a separate -- a separate court order in two weeks for
the money? Or can we do that?
MR. ODOM: I would assume if you authorize me to
build it, I guess I have to build it and I have to make it
work, and that is the way I took it. Other than is there
something I don't know? And I was hoping that the Court had
a fund somewhere, a 15-something or a 13 fund.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You knew better than that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would suggest that you
might have excess funds in your fuel account.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think so too, or his
emulsions account.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But that --
MR. ODOM: We won't know that until I open the
bids.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis, can you give us some
help here?
MS. HARGIS: Well, I mean, we'll have to look at
his budget once he gives me an amount.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, and look in other areas, too,
maybe.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Since we're saving the Sheriff
a lot of time --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I want to make a comment on
2-9-09
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
this.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Get the moneys out of the
Sheriff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I definitely want to make a
comment on this.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Jailers' salaries.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Get some money out of
jailers' salaries.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have -- I don't --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Or fuel.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: In reality, it could save us a
bunch.
JUDGE TINLEY: Why don't --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Could.
JUDGE TINLEY: Why don't we let the Auditor do some
mental gymnastics back there with the numbers, and we'll come
back to that one.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, out of the Sheriff's
budget.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Can I make a comment about
this whole issue, though? And the Judge knows this. We have
gone around and around and had the County Attorney's office
involved in setting policy with this transporting patients
all over the state, and it literally has been all over the
state. Whether it's El Paso, Big Springs, Rusk, Austin, San
2-9-09
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
Antonio, it's constant. And we have pretty well decided here
lately that the law doesn't allow us to do that. It allows
us to take them to the nearest inpatient facility, which is
Kerrville State Hospital, nowhere else. So -- and then
that's when we found out that the 16 beds we were supposed to
have at Kerrville State Hospital were being used for
long-term and also for forensics, and they were making us
take these other ones. So, I think we've gotten a handle on
that.
The issue I had with this, and I'm in total
agreement with it, is if it works and they -- and they pretty
well tell us that -- I don't know if you want to say
"guaranteed" or whatever, but this area for M.H.M.R. is 19
counties, 19-county cachement area, and those 16 beds serve
those 19 counties. Now, if Kerr County's going to pay all
this, I don't want to be transporting inmates -- or patients
anywhere. We shouldn't have to at all. And I'm not -- I
don't think we're going to. And I'm not sure, the last time
I dealt with M.H.M.R., if they have the funds to even buy
their vans or whatever and transport their own patients
somewhere; I don't know how that's going to work through all
this Legislature stuff. But us and the City of Kerrville
have spent major money in the last few years having to
transport patients when the law doesn't allow us to when
there's a local facility here. Except for the juveniles; the
2-9-09
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
minors, we have to, 'cause there isn't an appropriate
inpatient one for them. But I just want to make sure that
Kerr County, out of those 19 county catchment areas, we're --
if y'all are going to do this, we get the beds, 'cause we
have to have them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we get the beds? That was a
nod. That was an affirmative nod.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Went up and down; I saw it.
MR. WEDEN: Yes. In the crisis stabilization unit,
the maximum length of stay of any patient to get stabilized
is 14 days, so there will be much more availability of beds.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And does Kerr County -- if
we're the ones to pay, do we get priority out of the 19
counties?
MR. WEDEN: We will be the local unit, so they can
bring anybody over any time.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: The advantage also there is, once
they go to crisis stabilization unit, if they then require a
longer term treatment, --
MR. WEDEN: Then Hill Country will transport.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- it's their patient, and they have
to transport wherever they have to transport to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm sorry, Commissioner?
2-9-09
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm just wondering if that's
the place for -- you know, I have some friends that need to
be stabilized. And -- (Laughter.) You think that that would
be the place for them?
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, some of those friends
that you're talking about, when I talked to them, they
suggested you need to be stabilized.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's possible.
That's actually what I'm saying. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, do you want to go ahead
and authorize Road and Bridge to do it so they can start
their planning? Then we could come back at our next meeting
to find out where the funds come from.
JUDGE TINLEY: If that's the way you want to play
it, that's fine with me, Commissioner. Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it's a commitment.
I mean, we want to commit to it. I'll second that.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Here's the deal. If -- if
M.H.M.R. decides to come up with the money, then he can start
today.
MR. ODOM: Does this give me permission to go out
to start this work?
2-9-09
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Yep.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MR. ODOM: All right. Then I will -- Commissioner
Baldwin, I will look to be as frugal as I can.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: As usual.
MR. ODOM: As usual.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion on
that motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Okay. We
have a 9:30 timed item. We'll go to that. Item 6,
Commissioner Baldwin announcing a 911 signage campaign.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. This is something
new and -- new and exciting. Mr. Amerine from the 911
system, please come forward. Let's talk about our new 911
signage campaign that's old.
MR. AMERINE: Thank you, Judge Tinley,
Commissioners. Bill Amerine, Executive Director for Kerr
Emergency 911 in Kerr County, Texas. We've done this sign
production for residences and businesses since I've been
2-9-09
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
here, 2003. We've publicized this in the past in the local
papers and through flyers and mailboxes. As a matter of
fact, letters that we provide today when people come in to
get address verifications or get new addresses, we have a
little verbiage on the bottom that specifically spells out
that appropriate signage is critical to their -- to their
safety. There is still a large segment of our citizenry here
that hasn't gotten that message and still don't sign their
properties. Rural dwellings are probably the worst offenders
of this common-sense application of their own safety.
Primarily, -- and I think, and it's pure speculation on my
part -- there seems to be an imbalance between people that --
the desire for their privacy and their own safety.
So, with Commissioner Baldwin calling me last week
and they're not alone. I'm sure the Sheriff, the local city
police, paid fire departments and volunteer fire departments
could tell you about what should take 10, 15 minutes to find
a 911 caller can take as much as an hour and a half, as they
can go door to door or farm to farm, ranch to ranch trying to
find where the call came from. So, what we'll do to try to
reach those folks that we haven't reached is, we'll get in
contact with the individual volunteer fire departments and
we'll go out into the community on selected dates, after
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
38
get the word out that that signage is critical. I'll spend
30 seconds, and then I'll take questions, explaining all the
effort that goes into handling a 911 call, and the fact that
that individual citizen is the weakest link in that process.
When you think about a 911 call, all the work that goes into
that, all the people that participate, typically it's
anywhere from 3 to 15 people that respond in an emergency.
You look at the training, their certifications, the time they
spend perfecting their skills so that when they get that
call, when they get the direction to go out and provide
assistance, that they can do so quickly, and most adequately,
that they can deal with that emergency. The one step, the
weakest link is the citizen.
A lot of folks don't take the time or the effort,
or they don't even really think about it. Most of us think
we're never going to have an emergency. I don't have to
worry about dialing 911. I don't need to be able to
adequately think about how I'm going to respond in an
emergency when my child is sick, my wife is unconscious, my
house is on fire. So, they don't think about that sign
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
39
Now, our system, what we've done and what we have
with an address, so the dispatcher already has an advantage,
where our wireless calls, all but one carrier provides
latitude and longitude when you dial 911. So, we're going
to -- going to find you, most likely. But when you actually
get out to that residence and you don't see any visual
indication that you've found it, and there's multiple
residences, you end up going door-to-door. I don't
understand why folks don't understand that concept, why they
lack the foresight to think, "Gee, you know, this little blue
sign, or a sign of my own making will make the difference
between life and death, or saving my property." So, I'm
trying to be -- to be a little bit more dramatic than normal,
but it is really the weakest link in this whole process. And
we'll get the word out, with Commissioner Baldwin's blessing,
to all the volunteer fire departments -- the Court's
blessing. And we'll get out in the community and try to get
some of those signs up. Now, in the six years I've been
here, we've probably produced about 11 and a half signs -- 11
and a half thousand signs, but by my estimation alone,
2-9-09
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
there's probably about 3,000 to 4,000 residences out there,
or farms, ranches that have no signage at all, and those are
just disasters waiting to happen. So, we'll do our best.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill, along with that, I
think there is a segment out there, too, that think, "Well
you know, I'm not going to let government tell me what to do
and put signs, numbers and all that on my property." It's
not about us wanting or needing your information. It's about
us coming there to save your life and your property.
MR. AMERINE: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And -- see, and that's where
you and I agree, is that I don't -- I don't understand people
not getting that concept. We're there to help them, and
that's the only reason that we're doing this thing. And what
is the cost of this sign?
MR. AMERINE: It's less than what you'd spend on
lunch here in town. It's $5 for a sign.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: $5.
MR. AMERINE: For someone to come into our office
and purchase a sign, and we verify their address. We want to
make sure the data that's displayed to our dispatchers is
correct, so we take a few moments to verify the information
they provide to us. They say, "This is my address." We
verify it. The time it takes to verify that and produce a
sign is less than five minutes. No one's ever had to wait to
2-9-09
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
get a sign produced in our office. Now, we're open 8:00 to
6:00 Monday through Friday. There's always someone there
that can produce a sign. It's the cheapest insurance you can
get to make the difference between perhaps a 15-minute
response and an hour and a half response. And, you know, it
frustrates me, but I'm just an administrator. You need to
talk to the responders who, like I said, spend thousands of
hours of their time certifying to be able to respond to these
emergencies, and they end up going door-to-door going, "Did
you call 911? Did you call 911?" And it happens a lot more
frequently than I think a lot of people are aware. So, we'll
do our best to get the word out again, and get some signs
I made .
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bill?
MR. AMERINE: Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The problem is, people don't
think. You know --
MR. AMERINE: They don't think it's going to happen
to them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. In your efforts, if you
would make sure you work with the Comfort Fire Department,
~' 'cause they have such a huge area.
MR. AMERINE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you may note in your press
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
42
MR. AMERINE: Is there?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Comfort News and the Comfort
Connection. Both small, but people do read them. And, you
know, you'll probably get in that part of the county more
feedback by doing those little local papers.
MR. AMERINE: We want to do this as quickly as we
can in the first part of this year, but in talking to a
couple of the volunteer fire chiefs, they've suggested, and I
think it's a good idea, that they typically have fundraisers
throughout the year, barbecues and other things, and they
generally get a pretty good turnout, 'cause they send out
flyers to all of their contributors in their communities, and
say, "Hey, we're going to do this as a fundraiser." We might
do some of our sign-making events at those events, 'cause
you're going to have turnout of hundreds of people. That
might reach more folks that way. So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Any idea how large the
segment is that don't have signs, Bill?
MR. AMERINE: I think it's 3,000 to 4,000 dwellings
in the unincorporated area of Kerr County that probably still
have no signage. I mean, I'll give you a for instance. If
you drive from Kerrville out to Comfort, there should be 122
address signs on the highway, and the last count last time I
drove out there to my dentist in Comfort, I counted about 45.
2-9-09
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
14
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
So, there's at least 80 accesses into properties out there
that have no signage at all. And a lot of these, if you --
if you're familiar with that road -- and I know you are;
that's your area out there, as well as you, Commissioner
Letz. A lot of these properties that you can't even see the
dwellings from Highway 27.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. AMERINE: They're way off the road. So, out
there at the gate or the fence line, a simple blue sign that
has that number on it, and doesn't tell anybody anything;
it's just a number. Doesn't say who lives back there or what
property you have. You know, it's just really nonsense not
to put this sign up.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good program.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Bill.
MR. AMERINE: You're welcome.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Amerine. Let's move
to Item 8; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
set a public hearing for the revision of plat for Lots 2A-1
and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley Number 2 subdivision, located in
Precinct 2. Mr. Odom.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Mr. Frandolig owns Lot 2A,
5.01 acres in Pecan Valley Number 2 Subdivision, recorded in
Volume 6, Page 316, Plat Records. The gentleman wants to
subdivide his 5.01 acres into Lot 2A-1, 2 acres, and Lot
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
44
2A-2, 3 acres. Pecan Valley uses Aqua, Texas for their water
service, and have submitted a letter having the approved
water availability for the additional lot. The subdivision
of Lot 2A would put the total number of lots in Pecan Valley
Number 2 at 45 lots. Maximum number of lots in Pecan Valley
Number 2 is 74 lots. At this time, we ask you to accept the
revision of Tract 2A in Pecan Valley Number 2 and set a
public hearing for March the 23rd, 2009, at 10:05 a.m.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Actually, we're just setting a
public hearing, and we're doing the approval after the public
hearing.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Your request, then, is to set a
public hearing for March the 23rd, 2009, at 10:05 a.m. on
this matter before the Court?
MR. ODOM: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I so move.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second for
setting the public hearing as indicated. Question or
discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Leonard?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Great job of presenting all the
information. I mean, I'm -- I know it was a simple one, but
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
45
you went through the total number of lots they're allowed to
have and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Makes it real clear, and I
didn't have to ask any questions.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to
Item 9, if we might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to authorize Road and Bridge Administrator to
collaborate with the City of Kerrville on sealcoating project
for city streets. I put this on the agenda. As I'm sure the
members of the Court will recall, a few years ago, I
suggested that we need to find other ways to collaborate with
our local government partner to provide efficiency to our --
our common constituents and taxpayers, and one of the items
was to try and find some way to combine the efficiencies of
the two departments in road matters. And we had a little
test project here last year that apparently went off pretty
good, and now we've got another project on the board that
Mr. Odom and Mr. Hastings from the City have -- have put
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
46
together that they want to collaborate on, and I think we can
create some efficiency with our constituents and taxpayers in
the city by collaborating with this project. This project,
unlike the other one, would not involve the County acquiring
any materials. We would require them, but they would be paid
for by the City.
MR. ODOM: Paid for, right.
JUDGE TINLEY: They'd be acquired under our -- our
bid process --
MR. ODOM: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that we have the price locked in,
but we'd be reimbursed from the City. And the backup
indicates that the City would do all the prep work, the base
work, the traffic control, things of that nature. And
because we have the right kind of equipment, when it came
time to do the actual sealcoating, we'd bring our equipment
and our personnel in. We'd shoot, we'd lay the rock down,
we'd roll it, and voila, we're done.
MR. ODOM: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, I've got a question.
MR. ODOM: Okay, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are we sure that the City
wants -- wants us to participate in this? Or is this what
we're doing? We're asking Leonard to find out the answer to
that question? Well, lookie here.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
47
MR. HASTINGS: Yes. Commissioner Baldwin,
absolutely, City's on board. All of our Council members are
on board with this. Len and I are on board. We've worked
out the logistics; we've gone and looked at the site. He
told us what he needed to have done to have it prepped. We
prepped about 75 percent of it, but we've got until, you
know, June or July, sometime this summer when it gets hot,
before the work actually gets done, so we will be ready.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And so y'all -- the
City pays for the material, and we do the work.
MR. HASTINGS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a good deal. Now,
what do -- what do we get -- do we get anything in return?
MR. HASTINGS: Some happy taxpayers.
MR. ODOM: Attaboy.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we'll --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who live in Precinct 2.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- is that what this is
about?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what this is, a
Precinct 2 deal?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's either that, or we're
making -- we're making the City Councilman that's really
concerned about double taxation happy.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
48
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That, too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One of those two issues.
MR. HASTINGS: Both.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Both.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, this is a
collaborative effort to increase efficiency for our common
constituents and taxpayers.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good. Now, what about --
the next agenda item is floodplain. Could it possibly be --
I mean, could we see a trade-off there? I'm not suggesting
that in any way, but...
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oops.
MR. HASTINGS: No.
MR. ODOM: I wouldn't take that as a final no,
Commissioner. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What roads are y'all --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is all very
enlightening, but can I ask exactly which road is it off of
Singing Wind that we're rehabbing?
MR. HASTINGS: The Olympic Drive, and then there's
several streets that are off of Olympic Drive. The names are
escaping me right now, but it's about 3 miles -- linear miles
total of roadway.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
MR. HASTINGS: Yes, sir.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
49
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the time estimate? I
mean, how long will it take you to do 3 miles in this area?
MR. ODOM: Less than a week. And I -- you know, if
everything was there and everything was ready and no
problems, I figured three to four days, we're out of there.
However, worst scenario, two weeks, it's over with.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When would you start?
MR. ODOM: I want to -- I don't have a definitive
answer, but it will be when the weather arms up. I have some
sealcoat that I wish to do. I had one gentleman leave that
was doing the distributor, so I have some work I want to do
on some dirt roads to get some experience with our crews, and
then if they're ready, maybe we would shoot that before I get
into all mine. But we have so much ready now, and it looks
like most of this will be ready by April. By the first of
May, we ought to have everything that we're going to do
ready, and then we will move in to start doing sealcoat.
What's not done will be deferred into the summer, and we'll
finish it, and we'll probably hit them somewhere in that
first interim sometime, if they're ready.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the agenda
item.
I COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
50
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.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I still think we need to see
what we get in return, though.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We can come up --
JUDGE TINLEY: Wait a minute, Charlie. Hold it.
MR. ODOM: Don't leave, Charlie. You already know
about the next one.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We can come up with things,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, before Charlie gets
away, can we do that --
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, because of the
possibility on the next item that -- that there might be some
executive session required, I re-agendaed that to indicate
that. Do you want to consider item 10 now, or do you want to
go ahead and move that towards the back?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to move it towards
the back.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I think it's a
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
51
separate conversation.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, as long as Charlie's
still here, can we take 13? 'Cause it involves a discussion
he and I have had.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's move, then, to Item 13,
if we might. Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
to set a public hearing for the 2009-2010 Texas Community
Block Grant Colonia Fund for 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, February
24th, 2009, in the Commissioners Courtroom of Kerr County
Courthouse, with Grantworks to conduct that public hearing.
Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. This is
a continuation of our sewer project and the cleanup mode, and
then seeking some funding through the Colonias C.D.B.G. Block
Grant funds for the cleanup of other projects. We still have
some work to do after we finish what's in the conduit right
now in Kerrville South. We'd like to finish Quail Valley,
and we'd like to be able to hook up the apartment house
complex at the corner of Ranchero and Quail Valley. It's
actually on Ranchero Road, about 52 units in that apartment
house complex. Also, Commissioner Oehler and I have had
discussions about this. There is a -- there is a mobile home
park; I believe it is Blue Ridge~s~OCase --
', COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Blue Ridge.
z-G-o9
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In Bruce's precinct. And,
Charlie, I'll get to a discussion with the City in just a
second. That the City started that project, or received
funding for it, and went as far as the funds would take them,
I believe, about four, five years ago. Is that correct,
Charlie?
MR. HASTINGS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Something like that. And
this would give us an opportunity to finish that project up
and roll it all up into one block grant request through
O.R.C.A. I had a discussion with Mr. Hastings and City
Manager Don Davis about these projects, and I believe it's
~~, going to be on your agenda coming up --
i
I~! MR. HASTINGS: February 24th.
', COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- February 24th for the
same purpose. Grantworks, as the Court will remember,
typically conducts these public hearings in which they
participate, and they tell the public exactly what the
application's all about and what projects it would entail and
so forth and so on, and they will do that in the
Commissioners Courtroom on the 24th. This would be an
application for the '09-'10 funding. It would be possibly a
half million dollar cleanup grant. That's what it would
entail. Charlie, do you have anything to add from the city
point of view?
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
53
MR. HASTINGS: Sure, I'd love to. Thank you. I
will be preparing that agenda bill this week for
February 24th, so Council will get their first heads-up on
that next week when the agenda bill packets go out. But the
-- some of the hurdles that we needed to make sure -- and
bases that we needed to cover before our Council could
proceed, number one, I needed to check into our capacity, and
you've delivered those values to us. We've plugged them into
our model. I should have an answer this week as to do we
have capacity immediately, and if we don't, how can we manage
it? The second issue would be nonpayment management. We
have sometimes customers that refuse to pay, and in the city,
if you don't pay your sewer bill, we turn your water off so
that you can't use the facilities. And if you don't live in
the city, we don't own the water system; it's a different
issue. However, we have managed that in the past by working
with Aqua, Texas, who I believe is one of the water providers
over in Blue Ridge also in the Kerrville South area.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. HASTINGS: We have an agreement where they will
shut the water off. So, we're -- I think we've got that
managed. I'm not worried about that issue any more; I just
wanted to make you aware of it. And, of course, finally, the
last issue -- and this is totally a Council decision; I can't
make this for them. They have to decide whether or not we're
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
54
going to try to annex or not. When you ask for city
utilities, the process is that you're asking to be annexed.
And, obviously, we've got everyone in the Kerrville South
area; that's all pretty much hemmed up. And even in the Blue
Ridge, the -- that first initial phase, we didn't annex, but
still, that's a hurdle that has to be taken. So, those are
the three main issues. And the last one, annexation, is
really the big question mark that I don't -- I don't have an
answer for that.
I COMMISSIONER LETZ: Charlie --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There is one other piece,
too, and that's the potential capacity of the lift station at
the end of Quail Valley, which currently is in -- is in
operation now. Once we hook up the apartment house complex,
that lift station may need some upgrade also.
MR. HASTINGS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pumping upgrade.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Charlie, question. Do you plan
to put on the agenda on the 24th -- I think you said the
overall annexation issue? Because when it comes to -- I mean
two Councilmen have -- are --
MR. HASTINGS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- presenting that that's --
MR. HASTINGS: That is --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- changing the policy on this.
z-9-oa
1
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
MR. HASTINGS: Well, I can't remember if that's on
the February 24th agenda or if it's on -- in March, but I
know it's coming up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. HASTINGS: And that -- this issue will be
addressed very soon.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it's going to be -- I
read y'all's agenda.
MR. HASTINGS: Is it on the 24th?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it's the 24th.
MR. HASTINGS: I'm thinking it is too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's good, 'cause, I mean,
this agenda -- this issue is that the City is considering
taking on water and sewer outside the city limits. That's
what I'm talking about. 'Cause two Councilmen are saying
that the City's going that direction. You may not know that,
but Council thinks that.
MR. HASTINGS: No, no, no, I know what you're
~I talking about.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's C.N.N. that you're --
MR. HASTINGS: C.C.N.
JUDGE TINLEY: C.C.N., excuse me.
MR. HASTINGS: Yes. And that -- that's on next
week's agenda.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
56
MR. HASTINGS: No, that's this week's; that's
tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This week's?
MR. HASTINGS: That's tomorrow night.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MR. HASTINGS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I should have you some flows
shortly.
MR. HASTINGS: Excellent. Excellent, thank you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm working on that area.
MR. HASTINGS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And I have begun to gather
that information.
MR. HASTINGS: Thank you. And it will be the same
issues on that. It's the same area.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Same area.
MR. HASTINGS: Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thanks, Charlie.
MR. HASTINGS: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move approval of the
agenda item, and set the public hearing to be conducted by
Grantworks on February 24th at 5:30 p.m. in the Commissioners
I Courtroom.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
2-9-09
57
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
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is it -- shouldn't you wait and
do that after the City meets on the 24th and they approve
what they want to do?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's kind of a public
window. You have got to get the public hearing -- the
application will come back to us next time, so if there's any
problem, we won't proceed with the application, but we need
to get the public hearing out of the way.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or comment? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 10 -- or, excuse me, Item 22, which is a 10 a.m.
timed item. It is on your addendum, to consider, discuss,
and take appropriate action to approve one or more of the
following joint resolutions with the City of Kerrville:
Airport water line, TexDOT drainage project, U.S.D.A.
facility, and lake dredging project. The -- the City is
going to -- has requested that we join them in a joint
resolution for stimulus funding for the projects that are
enumerated. I think at least three of them are very familiar
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
58
to us. The airport water line, which I think was priority
~ one --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- in our stimulus package --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- ranking. The U.S.D.A. facility,
of course, we've been working on for a number of years. The
III lake dredging project, of course, is something that we're
interested in. The TexDOT drainage project, that runs from
~' -- it's on Harper Road; that runs from Jackson Road down to
I
~ Highway 27, I believe.
MR. HASTINGS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: And they're asking us to join with
them in a joint resolution for stimulus funding on those
particular projects.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I have no problem with
adding that, but I would like to add one to the list, which
would be -- I think it was our number two item, which is the
Hill Country Youth Exhibit project. I wouldn't know why the
City wouldn't want to join us on that one. It certainly has
major impact to the city, and that was one of our highest
priority ones. If we're going to do resolutions, we ought to
include all of them that we have.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know why we
couldn't do that. Even if the City doesn't add it to their
2-9-09
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
resolution, we could certainly add it to ours.
MR. EMERSON: I don't have a copy of the agenda
item, so I don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's good that you don't.
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's intentional sometimes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Don't give him one.
MR. EMERSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it would be preferable
for the City to join on that, since we're joining on one of
theirs. And --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: He doesn't want it no more.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MR. EMERSON: Pretty restrictive agenda item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Charlie?
MR. HASTINGS: I apologize, I didn't hear the full
name of that last project.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hill Country Youth Exhibit
Center. It's our --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Ag Barn.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- Ag Barn.
MR. HASTINGS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's a no-go anyway, so --
JUDGE TINLEY: They do not have time to put it on
their agenda for tomorrow evening. These items are on their
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
60
agenda for tomorrow evening. And, of course, I'm sorry,
gentlemen; we are where we are.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And these have to be in
Congressman Smith's office by --
JUDGE TINLEY: The first deadline that we were
given, and as far as I know, it is still applicable, is the
13th, which is this Friday.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now, that's to the Congressman's
office. You know, we've got to deal with what we have before
us. And, certainly, we could get one for the next meeting
and then transmit it to the City for their approval the
following day, which will be the 24th. I think that's the
way --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do we have a motion?
JUDGE TINLEY: Not yet.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right. Let me ask you a
question. So, we're talking about the airport water line,
TexDOT drainage project, --
JUDGE TINLEY: Yep.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- U.S.D.A. facility, and
lake dredging project.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
61
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all we're talking
about?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does it say "lake draining
project" in this resolution?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Lake dredging.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Dredging, draining.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Same difference.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, yes, except that
we're talking about three lakes, and one of them's right near
the city, and two of them are not as near. And I think
it's -- I mean, our intent is all three lakes. It certainly
should be plural, anyway. I guess -- you know, I mean, to
me, I understand we have some deadlines coming up, and I'll
go ahead and vote for this 'cause it's supporting, but --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, lake dredging could be
all of them.
JUDGE TINLEY: It says "river dredging," is what
the resolution says. River dredging.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This one says "lake
dredging."
2-9-09
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The agenda item says
"lake," as in one lake. All we need is an "s" on that lake.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Lake dredging could be any of
them or all of them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's just -- it seems to me
that we're -- I mean, I guess we have to get this to
Congressman Smith; if he wants them by the 13th, we should,
but we ought to clean these things up and do them as one
resolution, do them all at one time. I mean, we're splitting
up -- you know, why have three resolutions floating around
out there when we can do it in one?
JUDGE TINLEY: I -- these things may end up going
to different agencies.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then let's do five resolutions,
which I think probably makes more sense. I just think that
we're going about it, you know, backwards. 'Cause it doesn't
look like we've really thought this thing through.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How so, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think one of our
highest -- our highest priority isn't mentioned anywhere.
Our previous work mentioned Ingram, Flat Rock, and the Center
Point lake specifically, right?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, I think we need to be
2-9-09
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
consistent in what we're doing. You know, I guess we can go
ahead and do this and then send it, but I think it looks like
we're kind of disorganized down here. Which maybe we are.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, this stimulus thing, there's
not -- there's not a blueprint for it, and people are --
people are groping for how to approach these things. And --
and these things have pretty short fuses on them. And,
certainly, we can come back at our next meeting and do
something specifically, obviously, on the -- on the Youth
Exhibit Center, and I would actually anticipate the City's
cooperation in that. And if you want to bring one that's
narrowly confined to repair and upgrade of these three major
dams, I could see where that would be in the City's best
interest, if for nothing else, for the safety measure. You
know, if you got a safety problem with -- with Ingram, it
could cause some pretty good consequences downstream here in
Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why couldn't we do this and
then -- then clean it up and send to it Congressman Smith
immediately after we've cleaned it up? The point about
repairs is not mentioned in there, dam repairs, and that is
something we talked about. Yeah, I'm -- I'm confident in my
mind that the language with respect to Guadalupe River
dredging project could be defined and understood as being our
three lakes that we have jurisdiction over. I think we could
2-9-09
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
make that case. What we don't include in here is dam
repairs, which is something that ought to be part of --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It needs to be part of it,
just because that's where we're going to need to find a
couple hundred thousand dollars to start with.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, if we were to send
this -- if we were to approve this today, and then come back
with a cleanup resolution that -- that takes care of
Commissioner Letz' point that he made about leaving out the
Ag Barn, and strengthening it with respect to dam repairs,
why would that not work?
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's what we're faced
with, Commissioner. I think at this point, with the agenda
item being what it is, and where we are, that's pretty well
the only option we've got if we're going to get there, to get
all of those on the table before the congressional offices.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the reality of the
stimulus is, they're not even going to have a bill before the
16th, or -- if then, 'cause they're going to start haggling
between the Senate and the House now.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think being all
presented as separate resolutions, I would pull the one about
river dredging; I don't know -- this says that they've talked
to us, refers to us talking about that. This is the first
time I've ever heard it called a river dredging project.
2-9-09
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
It's not a river dredging project; it's a lake repair
project.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Dam repair.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Dam repair and lake
dredging.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think it's going to
look really bad if we pass it and call it one thing now, and
two weeks later, call it something different.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'd pull that out. I agree
~ with you on that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, but let me come at it from
this point. Now, we're not directly affected by the --
necessarily by the drainage project on Harper Road to -- from
Jackson to Sidney Baker. That's not something that we
traditionally would be addressing, but we're doing this as an
accommodation to the City for stimulus funding.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: They're talking about river
dredging, and that could be -- well be something totally
different from a specific dam repair and upgrade project, so
I think we could very easily be talking about two totally
different things. Because the resolution itself speaks to
river dredging.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Where did that come from? Do
you have any idea? Did the City propose that?
2-9-09
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, I do know where it
came from, and it's a little bit different in terms of its
concept. When you talk about river dredging project, it's a
little bit different than what we started talking about,
which was lake cleanup and dam repair. And --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They're talking about areas
that are unrelated to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They're talking about areas
of the river, and Leonard and I participated in a meeting on
~ that -- was it Friday? Yes, it was Friday.
MR. ODOM: Friday.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Last Friday, where there is
some new thought originating from the City with respect to
some channel cleanup or -- or mining in the floodplain to
improve the channel in areas outside of our lakes. So,
that's --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay, now it's becoming a
little more clear. I didn't know what you were talking
about.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's probably how you get
that river dredging project designation, which is somewhat
different than where we started.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Exactly. Doesn't have
anything to do with what we're --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're talking about.
2-9-09
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
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- we're talking about
wanting to do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somewhat different.
Leonard and I participated in that meeting with a City
Councilman, and met with representatives of the City staff,
and we talked about these areas. And Leonard can add
anything he wants to add to this discussion. And it involves
~~ -- it requires that if we were to move forward with it, or
permission from the floodplain manager to allow these
aggregate companies to mine in the floodplain, and closer to
the river channel, down around where the vegetation bar is.
So, it's a different -- it's a little different animal.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: As long as we understand what
it is that we're supporting here by voting for this -- this
agenda item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are we -- are we setting -- by
doing this, setting priorities of these over ours?
JUDGE TINLEY: No, that's not what those
resolutions say.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know that, but it's -- it
kind of -- you know, if you have joint resolutions on some
and not on others, it's a -- you know, it concerns me.
That's why -- you know, because, you know, I have no problem
at all with supporting all the -- anything the City wants to
2-9-09
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
do internally, and there's some of them that are joint
between the City and the County, but I don't put a higher
priority on that river dredging, as I've just heard
explained, over our lake cleanout and dam repair project. I
mean, I think -- you know, I don't want to get -- send a
signal that, you know, these are more important. And I think
we need to have resolutions on our next agenda to add
everything of ours and send them to the City for joint
approval.
JUDGE TINLEY: And I think that's -- that's what
I'm hearing is being proposed here today. Unfortunately, we
weren't in a position to do that today, but we can certainly
get that accomplished by next meeting to add the -- the dam
repair and upgrades, and also the Youth Exhibit Center. And,
like I say, I fully anticipate their cooperation there, much
as we're cooperating here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's one other element
which I'll bring the Court into -- into play on. In that
meeting -- was it last Friday, Leonard?
MR. ODOM: Yeah, I believe it was last Friday
afternoon.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Last Friday, the aggregate
folks there and members of the City staff and Councilman
Motheral, we talked about this river dredging, which was his
2-9-09
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
initiative, and I laid another one on him that -- which would
require some stimulus money, 'cause it would be a major
project, and that would be to -- asking the aggregate folks,
particularly Martin Marietta, to think about joining with the
County in a reclamation project, and converting the pit that
exists off of --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sutherland.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- Sutherland Road, the big
pit out there, a reclamation project, and working to create
an off-channel reservoir for stormwater, and I threw that in
the mix. You know, this doesn't contemplate that, but if we
were looking for some of this largesse out of Washington, we
certainly ought to be talking about it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we
approve --
JUDGE TINLEY: We already have a motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We do?
JUDGE TINLEY: And a second.
THE CLERK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the motion?
THE CLERK: To approve the joint resolutions with
the City of Kerrville.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: All four of them.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All four of them, okay.
2-9-09
~o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's the motion again?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Approve all four.
JUDGE TINLEY: To approve the agenda item, all
four. 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: We're going to come back
and clean it up, right?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Next meeting, we'll bring
those -- at least those other two. Thank you, Charlie.
MR. HASTINGS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here.
MR. HASTINGS: You run a fine meeting, Judge.
Appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
~! MR. HASTINGS: No, seriously, don't laugh at that.
I enjoyed this. Good meeting. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That doesn't mean you get a
raise.
JUDGE TINLEY: No.
2-9-09
~1
1
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: Unless the City's going to pay
for it. Then Buster would okay that. Wouldn't you, Buster?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 14; consider,
discuss, take appropriate action to determine whether or not
a policy change is needed in the Facilities Use Policy for
the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, to include all
nonprofits listed under the 501(c) section of the I.R.S.
II Code. I put this on the agenda as a result of -- the policy
now says 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(6), but there are obviously the
omission of a number of numbers there, and we had one come in
that was a 501 --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: (c)(4).
MS. GRINSTEAD: Seven.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- (c)(7) And this may not be
', something that -- that we want to take action on now, but do
we want to take a look at it? 'Cause there are a number of
different categories under 501(c) that delineate various
types of activities that -- that may have some bearing upon
what our policy is out there at the Youth Exhibit Center.
But the fact of -- we get a 501(c)(7) come in, it -- I can
not recall why in the world we came up with 501(c)(3) and
~' (6), to the omission of the rest of them. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What -- what is the general
501 (c) ?
2-9-09
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Charitable, educational, et cetera.
MS. HARGIS: Charitable, educational nonprofit
organizations. And, like, a (4) is, like, fire departments;
a lot of them are falling under that now. I'm not familiar
right off the top of my head with (7), but there's several
different numbers that have been created to further delineate
the actual nonprofit organization as to what they do, and --
and some of them don't require as much paperwork. A
501(c)(3) requires more paperwork to I.R.S. than any of the
others, so the rest of them, depending on their organization,
the paperwork involved, and being the type of organization is
a little less, so that's why a lot of them are filing
under -- the fire departments are going under (4) because it
fits better.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 501(c)(3) is for charitable
not-for-profits.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got the other designations in
there. Chamber of Commerce, I think, is a (6). It's
not-for-profit, but it's not charitable. You have all sorts
of different designations in there that --
I MS. HARGIS: Schools, different things like that.
'~~
MS. GRINSTEAD: (7) was a social club.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Social club?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the definition of
"charitable"? Charitable to me, or charitable to people? Me
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
73
or them?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm going to go with you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, I like that. The --
was that our intention, is to deal with charitable
organizations only?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think probably we
really didn't think through the whole thing when we set up
501(c). The normal thought process is that it's (c)(3) and
it's charitable and it helps some segment of the public.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Or are we just --
I were we focused on -- I would think that we were focused on
nonprofit.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That if they're a nonprofit
organization, then what's the deal? Whether they contribute
to some children's group or not, they're still -- they don't
make any funds. So, unless -- I mean, I can come up with
several things that I wouldn't support, but I would think
that just nonprofit. Who cares what kind of numbers they are
on the end of them, or what they do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, basically, I don't
disagree with you, except then you get off into the social
club thing. Is that where we want to go?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not sure I know what a
25 I social club is.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
74
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, so you're going -- so
we're going to get into specific things that we don't like?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's a category;
that's all I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We're going to discriminate?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's -- if you read our
rules, this 501 (c)(3) or (6) is just the first step. It
says we have to do them case by case. We can pick and choose
which ones of those we want, and I think it's a little bit as
to what the purpose -- I mean, my thought process is, what's
the use or purpose of the agency that wants it? Just because
you're a nonprofit and you decide to hold a meeting in
Kerrville, I don't know that we should -- you know, if all
the money's going to San Antonio, I don't know why we should
give you the discounted rate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I agree with that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We continue to add, you know,
every time somebody pops up, just like we have one on here
today.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wild Bunch.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's another agenda item,
but that's another example of -- you know, how many more are
there out there that we're going to have to add to the list,
2-9-09
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
I wonder?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe we should deal with
that agenda item, this Wild Bunch thing, and find out who
they are and see if we personally like them or not. Well, I
mean, that's what we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: See whether they qualify.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to set up --
and I don't think it's today. I think we should open it up
to all 501 (c) whatever, but I think we need to set up some
criteria as to how you qualify so we're not being arbitrary.
~i
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That may be the route.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think you have to be --
you know, to me, you have to be either a Kerr County or a
Kerr County chapter of a bigger organization, you know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think that's probably the
~ way to go.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's kind of what 14's
all about, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, yeah, but I don't think
we have any criteria to look at. I mean, I think --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I.R.S. Code would be
the criteria.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Well, that says if it
z-a-o9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
I4
15
16
17
I8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
76
even qualifies, but then you have another hurdle, a local
criteria as to whether it's a benefit to the local community.
'Cause that's what I think we -- we don't have that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Maybe we ought to pass this,
come back at the next meeting and come back with a more
refined agenda item.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. As I indicated, it may be
something we don't want to do this particular meeting, but it
lays it out on the table. We may want to take a look at some
things and maybe run them by the County Attorney as to
whether these are -- are criteria that are justifiable and
that are legitimate that we can use as to -- depending on --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just about any organization
can be nonprofit.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, take the Bar
Association as an example. Absolutely not. You couldn't
allow that to happen in our community. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good illustration.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything further on that?
Okay, let's move on to Item 17; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action regarding awarding the mass notification
system RFP's. Sheriff, do you have anything for us today on
that?
2-9-09
~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, I do, couple things.
JUDGE TINLEY: Can you do it in 30 seconds or less?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, sorry, won't happen. As
you know, we got about six different replies on the RFP's.
Going through those with Mr. DelToro, myself, my chief
deputy, Commissioner Williams, we at first narrowed them down
to two of the best ones, price-wise and benefits-wise. Then
we started going through those. One was a little bit better
than the other. The second one that we had narrowed it down
to, I called -- they're up in Ohio. I called three times,
left a message, never got a return call. So, I didn't --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That doesn't sound good.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- put too much stock in that.
The other one does have a rep in Texas. They answered our
response. We had a meeting last Thursday, I guess,
Commissioner, the day y'all went to the safety deal. They
gave a demonstration. It's very user-friendly. It's
probably one of the best systems I've seen. It's called Code
I
Red. It's used in over 100 different cities in Texas
I already. Very easy. It's a one-time fee, you know, no
matter if it's -- each year, no matter if it's this year or
120 years; it doesn't change. And it's unlimited minutes. We
can use it any way we see fit, whether it's emergency,
whether it's calling out, sending pages, e-mails and texts
i
and phone calls to volunteer fire departments about a fire.
2-9-09
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
Just, you know, gives you that much more advantage. Or you
can have groups set up into it where it notifies the
Commissioners of certain things in that group or, you know,
my department and certain parts of that group. But you can
also draw a line on the map and it will notify everybody
inside that line. Now, the way it works is, it tries three
~, times on the phone. It makes three attempts. If an
ICI answering machine answers, it does leave a message. If it
doesn't answer, it just goes back and tries two more times.
But it's a very neat system. It can make up to, if
our phone companies can handle it, 1,000 calls a minute on
that system, and for mass notification and quick
notification, I haven't seen anything that would come close
to it. And their price was -- was better than the rest of
them. In fact, this morning I had it ready for y'all, and
had the contract, and I just wanted Rex to look at it. But
on our RFP, it had said total unlimited minutes, whether
they're emergency minutes or non-emergency, and when I got
back the contract, it listed 50,000 minutes on the
non-emergency. So, I called them and they said, "Yeah,
that's the way it should be, because if it's total unlimited,
your price should have been 10,000 more than what it is."
And I said, "Well, your RFP didn't show that difference."
So, we will -- they're sending a new contract; it will be the
total unlimited at the same price that they had put in the
2-9-09
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
RFP. And, Rex, I just need approval from the Court to accept
I it, pending final approval and wordage in the contract.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How much is it?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 25,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which is what it's supposed
to be.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Actually, it's $25,250,
because the $250 is the one-time dump for the mapping stuff
that 911 will dump into it to give us a better map. And the
way this thing will work in the end is, it goes off white
pages. If your phone is listed or anything in the white
pages, it will automatically be in there. Now, there will be
a sign-up way of doing it on the internet to sign up, where
you can put your cell phone, your e-mail address or any other
phones you have, or if you're unlisted, you can put that in
there so that it notifies you, if that's what you want. And
people that don't have internet access could call our office
at that time, and we would help them fill out that paperwork,
so it would be online.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Who's the keeper of the system?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's done by Code Red. The
Sheriff's Office dispatch will be the one that keeps it and
activates it at any time, and there's only five users -- five
people that can have permission to use it, okay? So,
everything for mass notification would have to be -- to come
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
80
through the Sheriff's Office, depending on which ones --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the way it ought to
be.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And that does fit, because the
Sheriff's -- in our emergency management plan, the Sheriff's
Office is the warning point in Annex A of that plan. Anyhow,
so I think it's appropriate that it comes through us. But if
anybody needs it, then they can explain to us what it is, and
-- and we can activate it if we need to.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is really a -- this is
really a good system, and I want to make a couple comments
and thank some folks. I want to thank Rusty and Clay Barton
for their diligence in reviewing all this and -- and sticking
with it. Commissioner Oehler has been with me on this now as
we watched various demonstrations, each one being a little
bit better than the other one. I particularly want to thank
Mark -- Mark DelToro of 911. Mark has been a real, real
companion in this from the get-go, and not only setting up --
helping us set up these demonstrations, but setting up and
helping us with the criteria for the RFP, evaluating the
proposals that came back, and helping us critique these
proposals, and to know exactly that we're getting what it is
we think we're getting. He's been invaluable, and I thank
you, Mark, for that.
MR. DELTORO: You're welcome.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
81
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I would echo that, because
he's held my hand through it, 'cause I didn't know half of
this stuff. But him and Bill Amerine both did fabulous with
helping.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is a great addition to
Kerr County, our ability to notify people in confined areas
or broad areas. Depends on what the state of the emergency
is, or what the notification is all about. We can notify
people up and down the river corridor. We can notify people
with respect to wildfires.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or a tiger getting out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. Or a prison break at
the Sheriff's --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, don't say that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's just tremendous, and
we brought it in on budget, and we've got state-of-the-art
technology with unlimited calls.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And also, another -- another
joint effort to supply a service to the City of Kerrville,
who also is in the county.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's actually my point,
was I think, you know, that it looks great, and I really want
Rusty or somebody -- probably Rusty, 'cause he'll be the
i
point person, to go to City Council and make this same
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
82
statement so they're aware of what we've done, 'cause I think
it's important.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The City originally -- when
all the meetings and the demonstrations and all that first
started, the City was -- was a big part of that. They were
in joint meetings over at 911. Everybody -- and then it was
right during budget time last year and everything. So, I
won't say the City intentionally tried to back out of being
joint in this, but I do think that it worked out, you know,
just really for the better the way it is. And with the way
their contract reads, it would be hard for two entities to
have it without having two separate contracts anyhow.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, it's a much better
approach.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And so I think this is a lot
better. It would be a single point, and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think, you know, I agree, but
I just think it's important that, you know, the City be aware
that, one, this service is available to them, and that they
-- they also need to set up some criteria as to how,
presumably, the Fire Chief or Police Chief get information to
you that they want on there.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. Code Red has told me
they have several sample policies that their different
jurisdictions use on how to activate, when it can, and how
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
83
they work, so I want to get copies of those where we can
design our own policy after some of those to make sure we're
using it to the fullest extent.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, what you're seeking today is an
approval by the Court to accept the proposal from Code Red
for the mass notification system, for a cost of 25,250 --
annual cost of $25,250, the ongoing annual cost to be reduced
by the 250 because the information is dumped -- or is that a
recurring cost?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, it could be reduced by
the 250, or it may be that we include the 250 again in it
each year, because each year, I'm sure, with the new
subdivisions, new mapping coming online, we may want to dump
that same information into it again to upgrade the maps and
all that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're going to have growth.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You're going to have growth.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're going to have to put
that information in annually.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right now they get it annually
off the white pages stuff, but as far as the mapping, they
get it off, I guess, whatever map it -- DelToro could tell
you more about that.
MR. DELTORO: What we want to include with it is
2-9-09
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
our center line road files, segmented road file, and our
address point data, because when the user on the -- on the
screen -- on the map creates a polygon selecting an area to
notify, we want to insure that they're going to actually
notify those citizens within that polygon, because the
commercially available map data that Code Red is going to use
is inadequate for our area. So, we want to give them the
best data that we can, and we'll do that annually.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And one of the things, just on
the side, you know, they didn't -- one agency down around the
coast -- I guess it was Florida that had -- had the
hurricane -- one of the hurricanes last year; they not only
used it to notify their residents of the impending, you know,
hurricane coming. They ended up sending out the message two
hours before it hit, you know, one hour before it hit, thirty
minutes before it hit. Because what they wanted to do was to
be able to pinpoint where they would probably have to do
search and rescue for the people that did not evacuate,
'cause if they were there 30 minutes before that hurricane
hit, they didn't evacuate, so it gave them good locations to
search -- to start their search and rescue.
MR. TROLINGER: It was tracking the people that
answered the phone, actually.
MR. HERRERA: That's right, it was doing the ones
that answered the phone that, oh, they didn't evacuate, so we
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
85
know where -- and you can print out reports of everybody that
it did make contact with, that it didn't make contact with,
and however you want to use it.
MR. DELTORO: One other -- one other good feature
with it is it identifies -- if someone says, "Well, you
didn't notify me of that fire," well, you can always put in a
prompt on the message, "If you receive this message, press a
key." Doesn't matter what key it is. That's going to show
up on the report, that, yes, they did hear the message and
they responded to it, and you will have that as a record.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or at least you can pull up
the report and show that it tried three times, and it didn't
-- nobody answered, okay? Or that they did answer.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, you're seeking approval from the
Court to accept the proposal from Code Red, annual cost
$25,250, with contract subject to final review and approval
of the County Attorney?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move that, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second. 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.
2-9-09
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
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. Why don't we
take about a 15-minute --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge -- Judge, before you
~ do that, --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- could we go -- could we
go back to the visitors' input or the Commissioners'
comments, please? Just real quick? Say yes. Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes. Caleb, do you have --
do you have an announcement to make to us? Or introduction?
MR. CHAPMAN: Yeah. Actually -- well, tomorrow is
going to be my last day here in Kerrville, so I'm going to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See? There still is a God.
MR. CHAPMAN: But I want to introduce to y'all --
since we got your attention, this is Sonya Campbell, and
she's going to be covering the county from now on.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can she stand up so we can
see her?
MS. CAMPBELL: No.
MR. CHAPMAN: You're in trouble now.
MS. CAMPBELL: I'm glad to be here.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Thank you.
2-9-09
87
1
2
3 recess.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's take about a 15-minute
(Recess taken from 10:40 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if
we might. We were in recess. We have an 11 o'clock timed
item, Item 15, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action on request from the Texas Wild Bunch to be added to
the nonprofit list for use of the exhibit hall at the Hill
Country Youth Exhibit Center. Mr. Steve Napper requested
that this be placed on the agenda. I don't see him present.
What's the Court's pleasure? Pass it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Pass.
JUDGE TINLEY: And come back? Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, before we pass it, is
there a -- does anyone know anything about the group?
JUDGE TINLEY: This is the one, I believe, that
Ms. Grinstead says was a 501(c)(7).
COMMISSIONER LETZ: (c)(3) The backup letter says
it's a 501 (c) (3) .
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, that's right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just hasn't been added to the
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I just --
list.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
88
JUDGE TINLEY: (c)(3) is definitely includable, I
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. I'm not familiar with
that group.
JUDGE TINLEY: They do the -- the art show that
benefits the Former Texas Rangers Foundation. That's done
out at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center, I think in
April, if I'm -- April, or maybe --
MS. VAN WINKLE: February.
JUDGE TINLEY: February? Is it? Okay.
MS. GRINSTEAD: He should be here, too. Must just
be running a little bit late.
JUDGE TINLEY: But they've done that in the last
few years, but it has benefited the Former Rangers
Foundation. There he is right there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right on time.
MR. NAPPER: Am I up?
JUDGE TINLEY: You're up, Mr. Napper. You sure
are. You are a 501(c)(3); is that correct?
MR. NAPPER: That is correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And your proceeds -- the
purpose of the organization, and the proceeds from the
event --
25 ~ MR. NAPPER: Well, we've always tied ourselves --
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
89
we're the oldest organization -- professional arts
organization in the state of Texas. We've always tied our
shows and everything to another charity within the community,
of which we usually share 50 percent of our profits from
their quick draws and silent auctions, and our membership
pays for the fees up front.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where's the -- where does the
50 percent --
MR. NAPPER: This showing here in Kerrville goes to
the Former Texas Ranger Foundation, another 501(c)(3).
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval to be added to the list. 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. Thank you,
Mr. Mapper. We appreciate it.
MR. NAPPER: Thank you. I hope everyone comes out
and enjoys the show.
JUDGE TINLEY: Give us the dates on that.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
90
MR. NAPPER: February 21st, 22nd. Our quick draw
and silent auction starts at 4 o'clock on Saturday afternoon.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. NAPPER: And our local part of the problem is
our entertainment.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Quick draw sounds like a
shootout.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, so does the "Wild
I Bunch."
MR. NAPPER: I know. I have to tell you that we
could have sold our name to the Internet many times over.
We're always being contacted to give it up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And part of the problem is
the entertainment?
MR. NAPPER: That's right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think we better go to this
deal.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right on the edge.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Are you part of the
entertainment?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not yet. But let's wait
till that day.
MR. NAPPER: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: I thank you, Mr. Napper. Okay,
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
91
let's move to Item 16; it is 11:05, for that timed item.
Consider, discuss, take appropriate action on annual report,
membership appointments, and revised bylaws for the Kerr
County Historical Commission. Mr. Luther.
MR. LUTHER: Judge Tinley, members of the
Commission, we're required by statute, as you know, to give
you an annual report every year. This year the people over
in Austin have kind of doubled up on us. They required not
that this report be sent to them, but they did one that was
online, computer response sort of thing that I sent you a
copy of, and also there is an electronic version of our
membership list that I had sent to you earlier that, Judge,
you'll need to sign off on just approving our new members. I
did prepare a regular narrative sort of report. I titled it
an executive summary in hopes that you would read it real
fast, but let me just hit the high spots with you here and
answer any questions.
We're required to tell you about our membership and
leadership and activities. As part of looking at that
certified local government process, we realized that we had
to deal with the titles of our members. As you may recall,
everybody who was appointed by the Commissioners Court was
considered to be on a board of directors, and we had at one
time 84 people on the board of directors, which just doesn't
make sense at all. So, what we've done is, in revising our
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
92
bylaws, is do away with that phrase, "board of directors,"
and we now have appointed members, associate members,
reappointed, and as part of this process, we are elevating
some people from essentially the associate -- or what we had
called the general membership, so these would be new
would, in changing the name from general to associate, make
Robert Love and Vicky Love and Mindy Wendele and Joe Burkett
and Brenda Craig associate members, and then Wanda Henderson
would become an emeritus member, since she has difficulty
getting to our meetings.
The leadership hasn't changed this year. The
standing committees are not changed this year. And the
highlights of our activities this year, I'd just like to just
skip over these a little bit. We put into place, as you
probably noticed, a new planning/programming budget process.
Rather than coming to you and saying, "I need $100 for
pencils," what we're doing is coming to you and saying,
"We're doing these activities, and we need money in order to
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
93
do these activities." And so that system gives us the basis
of our plan of work, which I presented to you last fall in
our budgeting process, as well as our budget, and from that
we derive an annual report. It's just awkward that the
fiscal year for the county and the work that the people in
Austin are doing occur months apart, so I'm essentially
giving you a report that I've already given you in the past.
The new things that have happened since that time,
of course, the news today is on our collaborative agreement
with Schreiner University, and we're very, very excited about
that. And on your desk to be signed is this revision of the
categories of membership, we've added in, at the direction of
T.H.C. in Austin, participation or attendance requirements.
There are some people that are on our roster I've never seen
in the two and a half years that I've been on there, so we've
established a requirement for that, and had the executive
committee take on the day-to-day operation, rather than a
board of directors that was too large to handle.
In 2008, we researched, prepared, and submitted
applications for the following subject markers, and I'm very
pleased to tell you all these have been approved, and we'll
be putting them up when they come from the foundry. Apelt
Armadillo Farm between Center Point and Comfort. Walter
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
94
Apelt lives in Virginia. It was just serendipity; he stopped
in town one day and called me and said, "You know, I'm part
of this family. What can we do?" The Old Spanish Trail,
which I'm quite excited about. Tom Daniels out at the Bank
of the Hills has agreed to sponsor that, and we will have a
big dedication party -- don't quote me on that about the
party -- when that marker comes. Bill Rector was kind enough
to sponsor the old west -- yeah, the Great Western Trail
marker, because it runs right through his yard, and he was
just stunned to discover that for years and years and years,
an annual average of 300,000 cattle moved through his front
yard, not to mention horses and other things. On the Starkey
cemetery, last year we had it approved as a historic Texas
cemetery, and having achieved that, we've made it into --
this year it'll be a -- a historical marker for that. The
Masonic Building, Kerrville Times, the Mary Ann Morriss, and
the Starkey Cemetery were approved last year. The Times
marker has been mounted. The Mary Ann Morriss marker is due
to be put up on the 9th of March in Nichols Cemetery. And
the Masonic Building, I'm just waiting on Dell Sheftall to
give us the green light, and we'll go ahead with that.
In addition to that, as you know, we applied for
the one out here to go to Camp Verde. There was another one
at Camp Verde that was in the wrong place, and then the
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
95
courthouse marker, which will come here. We did an exhibit
Center, the Former Texas Ranger Foundation, the hills -- Hill
Country Trails program, the Cypress Creek Association, and
many others in order to further the knowledge of the history
of this area. We do this primarily through our web page, and
thanks to John Trolinger, we've got a really good web page
now, and this year we'd kind of beefed up the history section
a little bit to break out different time periods. For
example, from 1846 to 1861, and then during the civil war,
and after the civil war, that sort of thing.
A new -- new member has come on board this year
named Cliff Caldwell. Just came on. He's an author, a
writer whose project this next year is going to be the lawmen
and outlaws of Kerr County, and he's already written a couple
books on this, and we've said, "All right, go to it. Here's
some material. Here's some starts." I'm going to take him
over to the Sheriff's Office and get him introduced, and take
him out and introduce him to the Rangers. But already I'm
finding out about shootouts and hangings and lynchings and
stuff that I'd never known.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
96
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Wait a minute, now. Outlaws
of Kerr County. Sheriff's Department. Let's talk about this
for a minute. How -- how far back -- or how far forward in
history are we going to go? I mean, we're going to stop this
in the '50's, aren't we?
MR. LUTHER: No, I think we're going to primarily
stop it right at the turn of the century.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MR. LUTHER: He's really focusing on 1870's and
1880's.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You don't tell this man
anything about us.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm going to tell him
everything about you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Are you on this list?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He heard the word "outlaw" and
thought he was going to be on it.
MR. LUTHER: I might add that counsel has advised
us -- not Rex, but Scott Stehling has advised us not to put
anything in about people who may have been arrested, but not
convicted.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Scott's a good one to be
talking to about that.
MR. LUTHER: I think I understand.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
97
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, there is a -- a deputy
sheriff in Kerr County that was killed in the mid-18 --
MR. LUTHER: '80's.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- '80's, something like that,
and I got the notice this last month that they're going to
put it on the law -- Lost Lawman's Memorial in Austin, and
the national one in Washington, put his name. And he was
killed over here by Schreiner's Department Store in a
shootout.
MR. LUTHER: There's been a lot of shootouts in
front of Schreiner's.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That was a bad store back
then.
MR. LUTHER: Of course, the big one was, there were
five -- well, there were 20-some-odd cowpunchers went into
the store and got in an argument, killed a guy in the store,
ran out in the street; the local people killed five of them
on Water Street.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah.
MR. LUTHER: The rest of them rode up the Guadalupe
and hid out in a line shack, and the posse led by Captain
Schreiner burned them out and killed some more. And, you
know, it was the wild west here.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It was.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did the local citizens have
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
98
concealed weapons, by any chance?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They weren't concealed.
MR. LUTHER: I understand Mr. Schreiner had guns
hidden in cabinets on the second floor right by the windows.
He was worried about Bonnie and Clyde, too. Well, anyway,
lastly, to conclude, I will tell you that we have nominated
three individuals of our commission for awards to be
presented in Austin. We don't know if they've got them yet,
but we have nominated Dell Sheftall for the award of
excellence in community heritage development. He's
essentially put a million dollars of his own money into his
project on Earl Garrett Street, and is a faithful and good
member of our commission. Irene Van Winkle, you may know, we
nominated again this year for the award of excellence in
media achievement for all the family histories that she's
done. And Clarabelle Snodgrass, sort of a lifetime award for
achievement in historic --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excellent.
MR. LUTHER: History. So, that's the sum of our
report, and if I may answer any questions at a11, I'll be
pleased to.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any questions for Dr. Luther?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: When I look at your list, I see
a -- and this may not make -- may not be anything you can
fix, but I see one with a Comfort address and one with a
2-9-09
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
Center Point address. And everybody else --
MR. LUTHER: But they live in Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, no, I'm not talking about
those two. My concern is that there are not more. Comfort
mailing address and Center Point mailing addresses come
basically to up to the Ag Barn, you know, and around there,
and there's a -- a lot of -- I just see a lack of
representation from the eastern part of the county on your
board. And there are a lot of them that may actually live in
a home in Kendall County on the Comfort side that own
property in Kerr County. I would encourage you to make a
real strong effort to include more of the eastern part of the
county on your board.
MR. LUTHER: We have. That's one of our
j collaborative groups, the Comfort Historic Preservation
i
I
I Committee. I attend their meetings, and, of course, we have
a member of their committee on our commission. We put a lot
of work into the Cypress Creek Community area out there.
There are some really significant political and cultural
problems out there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's pretty diplomatic.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, pretty diplomatic.
MR. LUTHER: But you understand, we were going for
a marker out there at this Cypress Community, and they could
I not --
2-9-09
100
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Agree.
MR. LUTHER: -- agree on that -- on which history
you were going to write. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You sit here and watch us --
or watch him for a few minutes; you can understand all of
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. And you have done -- I
applaud the efforts you've made to go into that area, the
Camp Verde area and Center Point, but I encourage you to keep
i, going.
MR. LUTHER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 'Cause there's a lot of --
', MR. LUTHER: And we put quite a bit of new history
on our web site about the Cypress Creek Community and the --
when it was developed, the fact it was here before Kerrville
~, was here. And -- and, in fact, I have a map that shows at
one time all this was going to be Cypress County, not Kerr
County, and that was about -- it was in 1854. So, it's quite
interesting history out there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And they're still mad about it.
(Laughter.)
I MR. LUTHER: Yeah. Depending on who you talk to.
But they're really serious about this. They're not just
funning around.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you want us to do?
z-9-o9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
101
Accept?
MR. LUTHER: Accept the revisions to the bylaws.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move that we accept the
annual report, membership appointments, and revised bylaws
for the Kerr County Historical Commission.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval as indicated. Further question or discussion on the
motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Discussion. In the future,
please get a hard copy to us also, not just an e-mail.
Mainly because we need to get it into her files.
MR. LUTHER: I understand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have the bylaws here, the hard
copy.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know. I mean, I would go by
e-mail. It's not -- Cheryl did not have this.
MR. LUTHER: The report I didn't get out until
Saturday, so I'm sorry.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
102
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
MR. LUTHER: Thank you. And, Judge Tinley, if you
could just give those signed copies to Jody, I'll take care
of getting them to -- to Austin.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. LUTHER: Thank you very much, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 18, if we might;
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
implementation of the burn ban. I guess the 90 days is
coming on and it's time to do this again, right?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we reestablish the
burn ban for 90 days.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second, with a comment.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Question
or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rex, other counties around us
have additional limits on -- especially related to welding,
which is a big -- it's probably the biggest cause of fires
right now, or people working on fences. Or the one that you
were talking -- that you talked about earlier, that was
~~ started by a backfire on a generator.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is that what it was? I
didn't even know what it was.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. But can you look and see
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
103
-- I mean, evidently, a lot of counties think that we can
really go in here and start putting some pretty stiff
restrictions on stuff like that. County Judge in Llano
County thinks that they have -- we have -- they have more
authority than we do; certainly, Kendall County does. If you
can take a look at that? Because at least -- and I don't
want to curtail it, 'cause it's critical we get fences built
and keep people working and all that, but at the same time,
at least notice that they're going to be doing something, or
a requirement that they have a person watching while they're
welding with water, you know, on-site, or that you weld only
from, you know, 8:00 to 10:00 in the morning and that's it.
You know, there's got to be something that we can do to help
this, 'cause our fire departments are getting run ragged, and
it's going to get worse, it looks like.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That is something that I've
kind of looked into in the last week or so with some problems
in my area with people -- there's -- there's some
misconception, I think, about how you can legally burn.
Outdoor burning, you know, law is fairly stringent, and I
don't believe that the public is actually very well educated
of what those laws are and the notifications that are
required to those fire departments, and also --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And others.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- just to let people know
2-9-09
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
where you're going to be doing this, and whether the
conditions are right to allow it to happen. Prescribed burns
are pretty specific, and I think we've had some of those that
have been perceived as prescribed burns lately that actually
were not.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Fire department consequently
runs out when they're -- when somebody reports it, and they
get there and then they're told, "Well, it's a prescribed
burn," but nobody has called them. And so I'm going to try
and do a fairly good job of educating, or trying to educate
the people in Precinct 4 a little more about what the rules
really are, because, you know, after you -- if you lift the
burn ban, that doesn't necessarily mean people can just go
set their pasture on fire.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And prescribed burns --
I mean, the -- if you're not during the burn ban period, when
the burn ban's lifted, it's a little different. But
prescribed burns, under our rules right now, unless you have
a burn plan filed with the N.R.C.S., you don't -- that's not
', a prescribed burn; that's just lighting a fire out in the
pasture.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, they actually issue
the --
2-9-09
105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They don't have a permit, but
they have an approval process.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, approval. That's not
something that we do. It's --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, it's --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Joe Franklin does it for us,
and we've asked him to.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: .It's actually just a phone
call to get -- to -- I believe to get it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's pretty strict right now.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I know, right now it is. But
under normal conditions, it's basically a phone call to get
approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And once you have that
approval and conditions are right, well, then you -- you can
go ahead, but you still have to make those notifications.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You got to call.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They're not doing it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Got to call the Sheriff,
T.C.E.Q., and fire department at a minimum.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'd just like to make one
quick comment. I know in the last week, we've went out to
2-9-oa
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
106
four or five different fires. One was a burn ban violation.
Most of them are welders or other causes, generator
backfiring. And it's getting to the point of being past
serious. Some of these are really getting bad. I've
instructed my officers that we don't write warnings any more,
okay? And it's something that I don't mind the media, you
know, putting out, 'cause this is really getting bad on the
number of fires we're responding to, and half of them are
people burning that shouldn't in any way -- you know, they
think, "We got a little bit of dew in the morning. Let's
burn."
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And in 30 minutes, we're
fighting fires somewhere. The departments are with us, and
it's just tying up everything. But it's -- it's past the
point of serious stuff to us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Write more tickets.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We are filing cases every
chance we get, because I'm just -- you know, normally we try
and work with people, but this has gotten past that point.
This is one of those where it's kind of like passing a school
bus in a -- you know, in a school zone.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Glad to hear that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We ain't writing warnings.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion on
2-9-09
107
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
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 19, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
to approve use of Center Point Lions Park by Southwest Tandem
Rally on Saturday, April the 25th, 2009. Commissioner
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We've done this in the
past, Judge, motorcycle rallies. They headquarter here in
one of our two big hotels and tour the countryside, and end
up over in the little Center Point Park for lunch and -- and
a little rest. These folks are good people. They will put
portable toilets in and they'll clean up behind them. And if
they don't, I know how to get a hold of them, so I'd move
approval.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for -- to
approve the agenda item. Question or discussion on the
motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just have a plain
question. Why do you need permission for the public to use
their property?
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
108
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's a good --
that's a good question.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the reality is, we
probably don't. You know, but we've come to the Court on
other occasions for -- for event sponsors to use a public
facility. I guess the only reason is, if there's damage, if
they don't clean it up, if they leave it in a condition less
than what they found it, I think the Court needs to be aware
of that. We need to know that we have due course of ability
to get hold of these people. But basically, you know, I
think any of us could give approval for use of a public park
if we believe the organization is a good organization.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I look at it as a
courtesy to Commissioners Court, and I appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If they're putting Aorta-pottys
out on our property, that would -- that's a little -- that's
a little bit different than just meeting over there, you
know, informally, to me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They're basically taking over
the park.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Essentially, yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're giving them permission
to use it, and nobody -- basically, nobody else can have it
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
109
on that day.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I can do it any way the
I Court wants it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: And on occasions when I've had
inquiries made to me about using parks, if -- if it's -- if
they want the park set aside for their exclusive use during a
period of time, I tell them at that juncture that it's
appropriate for them to come to Commissioners Court. But if
it's just going to be a group of them down there, and other
folks can use the park at their own pleasure and in their own
manner, why, really, that's their park, and they ought to be
able to use it. But if you got a larger group, like the
Commissioner says, it's good to have the accountability, and
we appreciate just the courtesy of -- of knowing who's there
when you see a large group down there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we have a motion? If
not, I'll make it.
THE CLERK: We have a motion and a second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We do? All right. 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.)
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
110
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move
to Item 20, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
to extend the contract for investment advisory services with
Patterson and Associates for one year. Ms. Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: We have our contract in front of you,
I think, to extend Patterson and Associates to be our
investment adviser for one more year. Mindy and I have
discussed this, and we feel that it would be of great value
to extend this contract for at least one more year to assist
us with our investments.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the cost?
MS. HARGIS: She's reduced it to $1,000 a month,
and she basically hasn't billed us for $3,000 -- I think it's
$3,000 --
MS. WILLIAMS: Four.
MS. HARGIS: -- since we did the contract. We've
had it a year and a half. So, if she doesn't do very much,
she doesn't bill us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, it's up to 1,000 a month,
but she's billed us historically for --
MS. HARGIS: As she has actually used it, yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: My question to you is the same as it
was when we launched this balloon. Is our yield, based on
what you know about those yields, enough to give us a net
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
111
return after payment of the cost for that service that's
greater than what we had been getting previously?
MS. HARGIS: In the marketplace today, it would
probably be pretty hard, but I still think we are getting a
greater yield, and some advisory services on some new types
of products that we -- that even I, myself, am not familiar
with, and wouldn't want Mindy to go out and use without us
I! having some extra advice on those products. For instance,
the -- the FDIC coverage this year is 250,000, but there's
been some discussion as to putting these groups together
called CDARs where you can buy five at a time, and who that
bank is and so forth and so on. So, there's some vehicles
out there that we need help with still that I think would be,
you know, fiduciarily responsible for us to have someone that
knows and is knowledgeable of those documents before we try
to use them.
JUDGE TINLEY: And they've been products that
either give us more attractive yields or additional safety
that --
MS. HARGIS: More attractive yields and additional
safety, and also it keeps from us running all over town
trying to come up with 50 different ways of investing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
112
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(Discussion off the record.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We skipped a couple.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 11, to consider,
discuss, take appropriate action to reappoint Kenneth Wood
and Donald Oehler to serve on ESD Number 1 board for an
additional two-year term. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Their --
JUDGE TINLEY: I apologize for overlooking that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's okay. I move
approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Their terms are up. They're
being reappointed. They have agreed to serve.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go to
2-9-09
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
Item 12; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
appoint Vicki Barron as a member of the Kerr County Child
Services Board. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? 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: The motion does carry. Commissioner
Baldwin, do you want to do executive discussion on Item IO
that I've re-agendaed as l0a?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sir, I do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Why don't we go to Section 4
of the agenda, then, if we might. Payment of the bills.
MS. LAVENDER: Can I do the prescription -- can I
do the prescription bid?
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You want to come back to
that?
MS. LAVENDER: Please.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, let me make sure --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's not 2, is it?
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
114
JUDGE TINLEY: It's Number 1. The agenda item does
not allow us to do anything with it, other than to refer them
for evaluation.
MS. LAVENDER: Okay. Then we'll come back next
time, okay. I misunderstood. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: I apologize.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Was she ready to make a
recommendation?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, I think she was ready to make
a recommendation.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. Okay.
MS. LAVENDER: We'll do it in two weeks.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to Section 4. Item
1, payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'd like to make a
motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: And what is that, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We pay our bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second that motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and second to pay
the bills. Question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
2-9-09
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
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Budget
amendments. We've been furnished with a budget amendment
summary detailing five different budget amendments.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the capital outlay item
for Ag Extension?
MS. HARGIS: That's the van that you approved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: And the payment is only seven, and the
remainder was to go for fuel. That was kind of a combined
item, so that's the way we've done it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion that the budget
amendments as delineated, Items I through 5 on the budget
amendment summary, be approved?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for the
budget amendments on the summary as shown for Items 1 through
5 be approved. Question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we have
any late bills?
2-a-o9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
116
MS. HARGIS: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly
reports for Constable, Precinct l; Constable, Precinct 4;
Constable, Precinct 4, racial profiling report; County Clerk;
and Environmental Health. Do I hear a motion that those
reports as enumerated be approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I'l1 second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and second that the
named reports be approved as presented. Question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Do we have
any reports from any of the Commissioners in connection with
their liaison or committee assignments as enumerated attached
to the agenda? Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Here's a Workforce report
for the month of December showing our unemployment rate. You
can study it at your leisure. That's it, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
117
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- I've been spending a
fair amount of time last week in Austin meeting with our
representatives on some subdivision and related issues, and
things are progressing. We'll see what happens with the many
committee assignments within the House. And the other one, I
was thinking about going -- trying to get this in real quick.
On the stimulus stuff, if we -- if it's important to get all
that out this week, I think we ought to do a special meeting
to do those other resolutions. I also think we should have a
resolution that says that this money -- our preference is for
all this money to go to the state, and the state dole it out,
rather than it be earmarked in Austin and Washington.
Anyway, those are two ideas, but we ought to do a special
meeting if it's that important to get these things out this
I week.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think appropriations are
going to be coming --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, coming down to the
state agencies.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- this month. I think they
may extend them a little, but that's not a bad idea to have a
~', special meeting.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we ought to have the
whole package go out together at one time, and if Friday's
the deadline, we need to get it out, even if City Council
2-9-09
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
doesn't take any -- sign our other resolutions, you know,
after the fact. But we can certainly do it from our
standpoint. Anyway, that's just for you, Judge, to think
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or the Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thursday or Friday would work.
JUDGE TINLEY: Can't do it Wednesday.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thursday, Friday.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Big kitty cat has been
returned to its rightful owner with a new facility that I
believe exceeds the requirements to be able to house one of
these dangerous wild animals. That was a two-week-long
thing, and it is finally over, and I hope that everybody
is -- maybe not happy, but can be tolerant and respectful of
other's rights.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, one other quickie.
The Court approved working with AACOG to do some massaging on
census tracts, and that work is essentially ready for review.
You and I talked this morning about a meeting. They e-mailed
me back and said that the time that we talked about
2-9-09
119
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tentatively is not a good time. But just so the Court knows,
we'll be meeting to talk about the census tracts where we
have 8,000 more persons that may have to be split, and blab,
blab, blab. So, we need to talk about a meeting, Judge, you
and I, maybe the following week, at any time Tuesday through
Friday the following week. Okay. And I'll get back to --
that will be from the 16th on.
JUDGE TINLEY: Late morning Tuesday, on the 17th?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Late morning on the 17th?
Okay, that'll work. I'll send it back to him.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, what is the topic?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Census tracts being
reviewed. You know, we appropriated some funds from AACOG to
do that work for us, and he's coming back with a report. We
need to go over it with the Judge and so forth and see where
that takes us, and -- and in anticipation of the big census.
Tuesday. What time, Judge?
JUDGE TINLEY: How about 10:30?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that a you-two meeting or a
Court meeting?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge and me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But maybe the next one's
going to be the Court.
2-9-09
120
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any reports from elected officials
or department heads? Okay. It is 11:40, and at this time,
we will go out of public or open session to go into executive
or closed session.
(The open session was closed at 11:40 a.m., and an
executive session was held, the transcript of which
is contained in a separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: We're back in open or public
session. It is 12:07, it looks like. We will be in recess
until 1:45.
(Recess taken from 12:07 p.m. to 1:45 p.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order. We
were in recess until quarter till 2:00, and it is that time
now. Gentlemen, do we -- what's the Court's pleasure on a
special meeting this week to make the Friday deadline? Right
now, we could meet Thursday afternoon at 2:30 or after.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm out of there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Or sometime Friday.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not available Thursday
afternoon. We were talking about a 10:30 Friday, and it's
now canceled. You and I.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
2-9-09
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 LETZ: 10:30 Friday sounds good.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good. Special meeting to do all
these?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Fine with me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's before I even check my
calendar, but I think I'll be all right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 10:30's fine.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If anything's in the way, it
can just be postponed.
JUDGE TINLEY: That will give us a little time to
work on the agenda. Make sure you've got Jon's input on the
agenda.
MS. GRINSTEAD: We're going to word it "including,
but not limited to" whatever items.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That sounds like it'll work.
Okay with Rex?
JUDGE TINLEY: And stimulus matters.
MS. GRINSTEAD: Exactly.
JUDGE TINLEY: Including, but not limited to.
MS. GRINSTEAD: But for certain, dam repair and
then the Hill Country Exhibit Center. Anything else you can
think of right now?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The general one, which I think
is probably going to happen.
a-9-oa
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
122
MS. GRINSTEAD: What?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll tell you.
MS. GRINSTEAD: Oh, later?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. It's a general one, but
it's that the -- the funding should be -- go through the
states.
MS. GRINSTEAD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a personal opinion that I
have. Court may not agree with that one. As opposed to
having earmarks in Washington, I want them to flow through
TexDOT and however else they get down to us.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the way they've designed
them, anyway.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Except they have all these
things like refurbish this building in this town, and
refurbish this thing in this city, and --
MS. GRINSTEAD: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we got that? Okay. It
is 1:51, and we will go out of public or open session --
MS. HYDE: Do you want to keep it open, and then if
I have to name them, put it into executive?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, yeah. Yeah.
MS. HYDE: I think that maybe -- if he's here, then
we're kind of going to be on the same page on people.
2-9-09
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
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's scratch the -- we're
still in open or public session, and we're dealing with
Agenda Item Number 21; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action on Kerr County FMLA policy.
MS. HYDE: We've had some problems with FMLA in the
last month. But, as y'all are well aware, I talked to you
about the law changing as of January 15th. One thing that
the Sheriff and I have discussed, and I think he has a valid
point, in this green book, since we haven't updated it, it
says if an employee has exhausted all accrued sick leave, he
or she will be placed on family or medical leave under this
policy if the following situations exist. So, it's leaving
it open where people out there think that they do not have to
go out on FMLA, and that we don't have the right to tell them
that, "Here, we need you to go get certified from the
doctor." The law has changed. The law used to be 30 pages.
Here's the new law. Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why would the government
want to tell anyone how to conduct their own business, or how
to -- what leave to take -- you know, to take that choice
away from them?
MS. HYDE: Because it used to be --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why would we want to do
that?
MS. HYDE: You want a personal --
2-9-09
124
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN
How are we helping --
MS. HYDE: -- opinion? Or --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How are we helping an
employee?
MS. HYDE: Because the employee is protected. That
job is protected, and that job continues to be protected,
even though the employee comes back after I2 weeks of leave.
You can't do anything, no retribution, retaliation to that
employee for that medical condition. So, let's just take,
for example, somebody has cancer. An hourly employee has
cancer, and -- and they go out and they have their 12 weeks
where they have surgery and they start their chemo, okay?
It's an ongoing process. They might be in remission, but
they come back to work. Seven, eight months later, guess
what? It comes back. We can't fire them, by law. We can't
get rid of them because they've got cancer. Companies did
that. Companies took advantage of it. People that got
pregnant, if you went out and had a baby and you were going
to be gone for six or eight weeks 'cause you have a
hysterectomy or whatever it is when you have the baby --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Cesarean.
MS. HYDE: Cesarean, thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's close.
MS. HYDE: Sorry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That may solve it all.
z-9-o9
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
MS. HYDE: You know, people didn't come back as
quickly as employers wanted, so they got rid of them. Older
people that started having health problems, guess what? It
was costing them on their insurance. They got rid of them.
So, the Legislature came down and said, "You know what? We
ought to protect employees." But like a lot of times, the
law comes out, and -- and what they meant to do and what it
ended up doing was a little bit different. So, they've had
amendments and they've had changes. This new one is huge and
it's comprehensive, and it is not on the employer's side. It
is on the employee's side, big time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, today, if I get sick,
then I have a choice whether I can -- I want to take my sick
leave, I want to take vacation or whatever it is that's
available to me. I have that choice. And you want to go --
or the new law that we have not gone to yet -- I'm just
trying to follow what you're saying.
MS. HYDE: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That we haven't gone to yet,
says that if I get sick, then I automatically -- the
government -- the -- Kerr County tells me, "You will take
FMLA beginning day one"?
MS. HYDE: Sort of, kind of.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, why -- why would Kerr
County want to do that?
z-9-o9
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
MS. HYDE: What it says -- what it says is that
it's the employer's responsibility. If you don't -- first
off, as an elected official, no offense, --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. HYDE: -- you don't do --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wash cars out at Road and
Bridge.
MS. HYDE: Right. But if you're a regular employee
and you come up with cancer, you feel like it's nobody's --
nobody's business, number one. It's your -- it's you. It's
personal. And I've got all this sick leave that I've got
accrued. Why can't I use it? That's the argument. Because
if you don't come under FMLA, and Road and Bridge wants to
fire you, they can fire you. And then you can come back as
an employee and say, "They fired me 'cause I've got cancer,"
or, "They fired me because I had to have a cesarean," or --
well, not you, but -- if you were a female. Or whatever.
Because you're not protected. You're not protected under the
Family Medical Leave Act. And as an employer, now the law
has gotten more stringent. If we think, if they may, those
words -- help me here, County Attorney -- those put us on the
-- those put us on, and the employers must.
Now, that one, "must" and "shall" are the two words
that you guys have corrected me on multiple, multiple times
to give leeway. There is no "maybes" any more. It's, "You
2-9-09
127
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
will, you shall, you must." But on the employee side, they
~~ ,~
may.
MR. EMERSON: Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was
we shall forward the proper documentation for administration
of the FMLA.
MS. HYDE: You're darn tootin'.
MR. EMERSON: Doesn't say the employee shall take
FMLA, but we have a duty to provide it. If they choose not
to take it, they end up having -- under your scenario, they
end up having excessive absences, and we give them the
paperwork again and they still keep having absences, we can
cut them loose.
MS. HYDE: But the law --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But --
MR. EMERSON: By choice, though.
MS. HYDE: No, the law says now, Rex, that they
have -- we have to -- we have to put them on FMLA.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No.
MS. HYDE: Even if they don't request it, we have
to put down the leave is under FMLA if it's over four days.
MR. EMERSON: Show me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I can't imagine that.
MS. HYDE: Must an employee specifically request
FMLA leave? No, but employees are required to provide
information, yada, yada, yada. The employer, however -- it's
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
128
up to the employer to provide the information. And under
FMLA, an employee is not required to provide a diagnosis. If
the employer questions a medical, we -- it's still -- it's
all saying we have to send them out.
MR. EMERSON: So far, we've got to give them the
information; we don't have to put them on there.
MS. HYDE: Okay.
MR. EMERSON: Unless you have something different
that's popped up.
MS. HYDE: Must an employee specifically request
FMLA leave?
MR. EMERSON: They don't have to ask for it. We
have to give it to them. Doesn't mean they have to fill it
out and give it back and be on FMLA, but they're subject to
the standard personnel policy without the protection of that
FMLA if they choose to do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But that's my choice,
though, of taking -- risking getting fired for being gone too
long and all that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, but if you have sick
leave available, okay, and you're using your sick leave
legitimately, you're not falsifying your own sick leave,
you're not even risking being fired, because you've earned
it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's right.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
129
MR. EMERSON: Well, to an extent. Because the --
the technicality that comes in there, guys, is FMLA requires
you to preserve the position.
MS. HYDE: That's right.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right.
MR. EMERSON: If you take sick leave and you're out
too long, they may fill your critical position, and you may
come back as the dog washer instead of the car washer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, hell, we can't have
that, can we?
MS. HYDE: But it also says in the Wolverine vs.
World Trade that the employer --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Didn't give them notice.
MS. HYDE: No, the employer did give them notice.
What they did is, they took their 30 weeks of unpaid leave,
where they used paid leave time, and then they turned around
and said, "Now I want 12 more weeks of FMLA," and the
employer said, "No, you can't have it."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And what happened?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Supreme Court upheld.
MS. HYDE: Supreme Court upheld. The employer did
not. They had already taken it. Because they knew -- as an
employer, Wolverine knew that that person was out, and they
-- they had to designate it as FMLA, so they had already had
their 30 weeks, and it was never the intent for them to say
2-9-09
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
that you can have a year off.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds to me like that case says
even if you don't elect to take FMLA, constructively, you're
on FMLA.
MS. HYDE: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And can't use up whatever other
availability you got; sick time, vacation time, comp time,
good time, whatever time, and then later on ask for more, for
12 weeks on top.
MS. HYDE: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what it sounds to me like
that case says.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can you use your leave and
your accrued time off or whatever on the tail end of FMLA?
MS. HYDE: Well, that's why you have this from TAC.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You went the opposite scenario.
Take FMLA at the end --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If you wanted to go without a
paycheck for 12 weeks.
JUDGE TINLEY: One at a time.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can you use half of what you
had in the -- on the end of the 12 weeks?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If you wanted to go without a
paycheck for the 12 weeks you're on FMLA, and then come back
on a paycheck at the end, yes.
2-9-09
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. HYDE: And it's up to the employer. The
employer can -- the employer can determine whether or not
it's paid or unpaid leave.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it also seems like -- and
I'm -- if I follow all this that's been said so far, that if
we have to put them on FMLA after four days, then we're also
saying that they're not getting paid, then.
MS. HYDE: No. If we say that they can be paid,
then they can use all their time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if they're going to
be paid, then they're not on FMLA.
MS. HYDE: Yeah, they are.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. The whole bottom line
that I see in Eva's and my discussion, 'cause this did
involve two of my employees, is where we come to is, do they
have to be on FMLA at the same time they're taking their sick
or vacation? And Eva says yes, they do, if it's a qualifying
illness. And I say no, they don't. My -- my point in this
is, if you've got a good employee that hasn't ever abused his
sick leave, okay, and he's got a pile of sick leave built up
over here, and you got an employee that every time he gets a
day of sick leave, he's used it, now both of those employees
get sick, okay? This one's going to get 12 weeks of FMLA
still, even though he hasn't used -- doesn't have any sick
leave, okay? Because he's guaranteed that I2 weeks by the
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
132
federal government.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And that's --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This one's going to get that
12 weeks; at the same time, his sick leave is being burned
up. Because he's been a good -- you know, he's still getting
paid during that same 12 weeks.
MS. HYDE: Right. The other one's not.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But his time's less, 'cause
he -- this one's still going to be an employee 12 weeks
longer than this one is, in essence, 'cause this one's having
to use sick leave and his FMLA at the same time.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: At the same time.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And the issue I have with that
scenario is, first off -- three points. Number one, in the
current Kerr County policy, okay, what is written under 9.06,
Family and Medical Leave, if an employee has exhausted all
accrued leave, he or she will be placed on Family Medical
Leave. That's what's in the county policy now. If you want
to change it, fine, change it. But I'm not going to force my
employees to go on FMLA unless they've used up all their sick
leave, 'cause that's what the county policy says.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Do we have that choice?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Except --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- if the federal government
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
133
changes the law, that trumps our policy.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. Under -- and this is part
of the facts under FMLA. It doesn't -- it says under certain
conditions, employees or employers may choose to
substitute -- run concurrently, they mean -- accrued paid
leave, such as sick or vacation, to cover some or all of the
FMLA leave. An employee's ability to substitute accrued paid
leave is determined by the terms and conditions of the
employer's normal leave policy. That's your normal leave
policy right now. So, I don't think under that, we can force
them to be on both. And, two, the last deal, when you go
through the doctor's part the doctor has to fill out for the
employee, you know, to get on it, on the second page, it
says -- and this is where my employee had a big problem, is
it says, "Instructions to the health care provider: The
employee listed above has requested leave" under that. This
employee hadn't requested it, because she had sick leave.
She had vacation. She wasn't wanting FMLA, but she's being
told she had to be on it. If it was qualifying. My deal is,
if the County's policy is --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wait. But on that point, did
the employee understand that if her job was terminated
because she wasn't showing up for office, that she had no
recourse, whereas on FMLA, she would?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, the difference is --
2-9-09
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
134
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the difference.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If the employee's got sick
leave and vacation, and this isn't an employee that's out all
the time for being sick, okay? How can I fire them just
'cause they're out sick now, when they've earned sick leave
and vacation? If I did that as a department head, elected
official, boss, whoever, then I've opened this county up for
a lawsuit, because I've wrongfully terminated someone.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It depends on --
MS. HYDE: I'm going to agree to disagree to a
certain point, because if you have an employee that's going
to be out two or three months, whether they've earned it or
not, there are instances where people will terminate and will
separate that employee for excessive absenteeism. In fact,
that's one of the things we brought to the Court, because
some people didn't have an understanding on how to hold
people accountable to come to work. Just because you have
sick time doesn't mean that you can use it Willy-nilly how
you want to.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. That's where
your policy on how you use your sick leave -- you know, like
mine is if you're out more than three days, you got to have a
doctor's excuse. You know, go to the doctor, get treated.
That's how you control somebody from abusing sick leave.
It's not by saying, "Okay, you have to be on FMLA, sick
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
135
leave, vacation all at one time." I don't think that's the
intent. I think --
MS. HYDE: Well, an employee --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think the County does, and
we should look at the policy, and go back to where, instead
of having a cap on sick leave -- and as an employer, I'll say
I think the County needs to have a cap on sick leave. Right
now, I've got guys with thousands of hours, and if you -- you
do that, you could extend -- you know, extend that person's
employment forever, just about, and not be able to control
it. Not be able to replace it.
MS. HYDE: But at the end of 12 weeks, you can
still make that determination. If they have thousands and
thousands of hours, we've only allowed them the 12 weeks
which falls under FMLA, and they still have thousands of
hours, where if you determine you want to keep them for a
year, that's your determination.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But that employee -- now, on
this --
MS. HYDE: Let me --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But that employee that doesn't
have thousands of hours can burn it up. You're -- you got to
give him the same employment.
MS. HYDE: No, you don't. No, you do not. If an
employee is absent from work or informs you that they're
z-9-oa
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
going to be missing work, the supervisor should consider the
reason for the absence and proceed accordingly. There is
FMLA, and FMLA paperwork may begin -- Rex, underline the
"may" -- if absence is foreseeable. Remember, an employee
does not have to formally ask for leave under the FMLA and
required to make that determination and designate the leave
accordingly, and we only have two days. After we find out
that someone's out, we have two days. That's it. To me,
that's completely black and white. Employers are required to
make that determination and designate the leave accordingly.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But it still goes back to if
the employee requests it. If they've got sick leave and they
got vacation time available, by the current county policy,
they don't have to request that FMLA. The form the doctors
have to fill out, everything else, says they request it. "If
requested by the employee." Now, in your policy that you
adopt for the County as we're redoing the policy manual, it's
open. If we state in this county policy that if you go on
FMLA or if you, you know, have one of the major illnesses
that qualify for FMLA, then your vacation and your sick leave
will run at the same time for any that you have built up,
you're fine. But with the way the county policy is right
now, in that, I don't think you can force somebody to go on
FMLA until after their sick leave's burnt up.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
137
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let me ask a
question. Take an employee that uses up all of his sick
leave, okay?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They've used all that and
now they say, okay, now I want to go on FMLA.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is it our option that -- to
allow that? Or -- or can we deny that?
MS. HYDE: If they come to us after the fact and
they say that they have a serious health condition, then,
yeah, we can go back and we can retro the FMLA. But also, in
the Q and A, it tells --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You didn't finish up. But?
MS. HYDE: But.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is it our option to deny
it?
MS. HYDE: We can deny it, but if we deny it and
it's a serious medical condition, the only thing that we can
deny is -- is that they don't start until the day that they
turn it in. So, the -- the five or ten days, whatever, that
they were out, they could have been fired, and there's
nothing that they can do about it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, in the Wolverine --
Ragsdale vs. Wolverine Supreme Court case, what they're
2-9-09
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
Then after the 30 weeks, she came back and
said what the bottom line and the purpose of FMLA was is to
guarantee an employee 12 weeks of employment after they
became ill. Because some companies don't offer sick leave.
Some companies don't offer vacation. Some are just five
days. This guaranteed those people, instead of losing their
job immediately, because now they're ill, it guaranteed them
12 weeks of employment. Unpaid, you know, but 12 weeks of
employment. But the way it is, if you got a guy that doesn't
use up his sick leave, and he gets sick, he ought to be able
to use up his sick leave, then go on FMLA. That way it's
fair to the other employee who really -- that did use up his
sick leave, and now all of a sudden, he's got to go on FMLA.
And what Eva tried to argue with me was, well, at the end,
it's your choice after the 12 weeks, whether I want to keep
either one of those employees.
MS. HYDE: You can't -- no. No, you can't fire
2-9-09
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
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I know, for that -- during
that 12 weeks.
MS. HYDE: There's at least 180 days you can't do
anything, 'cause that's retribution.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But after that -- after that
12 weeks, you can. Okay, my deal is, you got to make it
fair. You got to make it fair to every single employee in
the way you do it. And either we have a policy that says
after you use up your sick leave and after you use up your
', vacation, then you'll go on FMLA, if it's a qualifying
illness or whatever, for the 12 weeks, or we have a policy
that says as soon as you become sick, after four days, and we
know it's an FMLA, you go on FMLA, period, regardless of how
much sick leave and vacation you have left. One of those two
is where the County's got to -- to decide where we're going
to go. And I think, being fair to the employees, let them
use what they have, then put them on the 12 weeks.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hyde, what are -- what are our
real options here?
MS. HYDE: Well --
JUDGE TINLEY: Is one of them, for example, to
change the existing personnel policy?
MS. HYDE: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: To provide that when a person has a
condition that qualifies under the Family Medical Leave Act
2-9-09
140
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I2
13
14
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and is absent from work, or attempts to accrue against sick
leave or vacation or other accrued time, that it
automatically shall be deemed to be -- regardless of what
else happens, to commence FMLA?
MS. HYDE: If it's a serious medical condition.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, if it qualifies.
MS. HYDE: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: As a -- as a condition under the
Family Medical Leave Act?
MS. HYDE: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's one option, right?
MS. HYDE: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The other would be to leave
the policy like it is, in which case --
MS. HYDE: Then if we do that, then I'm going to
I' request that Rex and I go to another FMLA seminar, because I
do believe sincerely that we'll be not following federal law.
If you look at those packets that came from TAC, TCDRS, and
i
the government, everywhere in there, the employee doesn't
have to ask. It's still the employer's responsibility, if we
think, for us to do. And it also says absent extenuating
circumstances, a regulation requires an employer to notify an
employee of whether or not the employee's eligible to take
FMLA leave, and if not, at least one reason why they're
ineligible, within five business days of the employee
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
141
requesting leave or the employer learning that an employee's
leave may be for an FMLA-qualifying reason. They're putting
all of this on the employer.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. HYDE: So, even if we think it could be, we've
got to ask them. 'Cause I'm not a doctor.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The whole deal under the fact
sheet, and that's where I would differ with her, is under
that interpretation -- under the fact sheet for FMLA, it all
comes down to what the county policy is. Because, again, it
states very plain, "Under certain conditions, employees or
employers may choose to substitute, run concurrently" -- run
them both at the same time -- "accrued paid leave, such as
sick or vacation, to cover some or all of the FMLA leave. An
employee's ability to substitute accrued paid leave is
determined by the terms and conditions of the employer's
normal leave policy." And that's where we're at. It's
whatever the County has as their policy on whether they
substitute it, or whether it -- it, you know, is one after
the other, one before the other, or at the same time.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's what this
fifth slide says on this Power Point here. Fifth slide.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fifth slide?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Fifth slide. Reads,
"Employers are allowed to substitute paid leave for unpaid
2-9-09
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
leave based on FMLA election." Your policy dictates whether
you pay. The law does not require you to pay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right.
MS. HYDE: That's why they say it can be paid or
~ unpaid leave.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's not --
MS. HYDE: But when I discussed this once before --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The policy of paying under
FMLA, you can do that.
II SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And if it's paid, that means
i
you're using up sick leave, using up vacation. That's
paying --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Leave time at the same
time.
(Several people talking at the same time; court
reporter interrupted.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Not necessarily. We can establish a
policy that FMLA is paid. We could opt to do that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Probably could, yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: If we don't opt to do that and the
employee wants to be paid while in FMLA status, they've
either got to take accrued sick leave, comp time, vacation
time, whatever they've got accrued.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
2-9-09
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: If they want to get paid.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Otherwise, they got 12 weeks unpaid.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: If it's a qualifying illness.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
MS. HYDE: If you go on down to Page 14 on those
Power Point slides, --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MS. HYDE: -- when it talks about supervisor
responsibilities, it's the last slide. It is the employer's
responsibility to designate the leave. Although they give
the employees the right to ask -- to request, it's still the
employer's responsibility to insure that if we think, we
better ask the right questions. If you go to Page 16, it
tells you the top ten mistakes that employers make, and one
of the big ones in the notes that we have, employers don't --
I mean, I'm not a doctor. I don't know if a hysterectomy is
a serious health condition or not, but if that doctor tells
me it is, then that employee is protected.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess I don't -- I don't see
the problem. If -- if we automatically, after four days,
whatever, put them on FMLA, and then it's up to the employee;
if they have sick leave, they can continue to get paid during
that period. If they don't have sick leave --
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
144
MS. HYDE: They're still covered, but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But there's a job there.
MS. HYDE: The rules have changed. See, before,
when they went on FMLA with unpaid leave, we had to pay all
their -- their medical. The law has relaxed a little bit; we
don't have to pay all their medical.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They can get sick, and all of
a sudden, our medical doesn't cover them?
MS. HYDE: They would have to pay. They would have
to pay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And they're protecting the
employee?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's why I think they should
be able to use all their sick and their vacation before
they're forced to go on FMLA. And I think, by county policy,
that's what you as Commissioners would set, is whether you're
going to allow them to use their sick and vacation -- accrued
sick and vacation prior to being designated as FMLA leave, or
at the same time. 'Cause I think it's a fairness issue to
different --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, at the same time, you
know, makes more sense. Otherwise, they're not going to have
a paycheck.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER:	It already	-- FMLA is	already
concurrent with worker's comp.	If you go	on worker'	s comp,
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
145
you're on FMLA. I don't have to talk to them, don't have to
ask them. They're on it, period. That's a --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we establish a policy --
MS. HYDE: Y'all are being designated that if I
know about it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we establish a policy
that -- that paid sick leave, or leave -- paid leave time and
FMLA run concurrently, right? When they run out of sick
time, they're still within the 12-week max.
MS. HYDE: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: FMLA.
MS. HYDE: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What's wrong with that
policy?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Nothing wrong with that
policy, if that's the policy that Commissioners want to
adopt. But if they --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand that. So,
what's wrong with it?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only -- the only issue is,
going back to an employee that doesn't have hardly any sick
leave built up, okay?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, but if they don't
have it, they don't have it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But, you know, as far as
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
146
saying an employee -- say he's got 12 weeks, okay? An
employee that does have a lot of sick or vacation built up,
now he's going to get to use his sick -- and maybe it's 12
weeks of vacation. He's going to get to use it. But right
after he finishes using what he's earned as a benefit to the
employee, now he's going to lose his job. Where the other
employee, because it's a federal benefit, he's given -- he's
keeping his for an extra 12 weeks longer than what he had
sick and vacation built up for.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I can't imagine an employee
not taking an option of using their -- using their sick and
accrued time --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: First.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- to run concurrent with a
policy that will salvage their job for 12 full weeks.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, what they're -- what
they're doing -- what I'm saying to you, Bruce, is I've
got -- say I've got a lot -- I got six months of sick leave
and eight months of vacation, whatever. I'm using -- okay, I
go out sick. I want to use my six -- six months of sick
leave and my eight months of vacation, 'cause I'm still
getting paid, all right? At the end of using all of those, I
still can't come back, but I'm not sure, you know, how long
it's going to be. Then I want my FMLA. I'm not getting
paid.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
147
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's too long.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It may be, but then I'm not
getting paid, but I've still got my job guaranteed for 12
more weeks. So, it's -- it's just depending on how you want
to do it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Rex?
MR. EMERSON: As an employer, okay, who's been in
private industry, who's worked for other companies, as
applied to this scenario, what would you as a court want as
managers if Jody went out sick, she stayed out sick for four
months with an illness? She's getting her paid leave. You
guys are running without any administrative support. And
then she says, "I want FMLA," and she's out for another three
or four months.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's my point.
MR. EMERSON: That's what you've got to look at.
You have critical employees in this county that you can't
afford to go without for "X" amount of time. You have to
protect their positions.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's why they need to be on
their -- if they want a paycheck, they're on -- they should
be on FMLA, but they should be, you know, using sick leave.
If they don't have sick leave, they don't get a paycheck.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Otherwise, they're not being
paid. They can't survive that long without being paid. I
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
148
don't -- most people can't.
MR. EMERSON: The clear intent of FMLA, as Rusty
said it when he was standing up there, is to guarantee
somebody their job for 12 weeks.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: If they incur --
MR. EMERSON: That's it, bottom line.
JUDGE TINLEY: If they incur a serious illness, --
MR. EMERSON: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- they can't just be pitched on the
street because they are ill. Which puts their -- a lot of
times, puts their health care in jeopardy -- I mean their
health care benefits in jeopardy.
MR. EMERSON: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: But it gives them 12 weeks to get
the boat in order, and if they have the time accrued, --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: To get paid for it.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- they can get paid.
MR. EMERSON: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: But if not, they still are locked in
for a period of 12 weeks.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But they're still on FMLA.
Even if they're getting paid, they're still on FMLA.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only thing I would ask, so we
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
149
don't have a problem with employees, is under 9.06, Family
Medical Leave, where you state in the current policy, if an
employee has exhausted all accrued sick leave, he or she will
My employees are saying I haven't exhausted it all; the
County can't force me to go on it. My form I got to give to
the doctor says I'm requesting it. I'm not requesting it.
You know, and this is what your policy -- you can't force me
to go on it. And then I have to look at them and say, "Well,
that's what the policy says right now." And that's where we
have a difference. All I'm asking is, one way or another,
let's straighten out the county policy immediately.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's what we've been trying
to do for the last two months.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, this is -- this has been
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We're trying to redo it; been
working on it all fall trying to get a new policy.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I tell you, you know, just
think about it realistically as an employer, just like what
Rex is saying. How long can you hold a position open for
somebody? I mean, how long should you -- you still have to
hire somebody to do the work when that person's out.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I agree.
2-9-09
150
1
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 mean, this can't go on
forever. And I -- I can't see extending it. It would be our
choice; if we want to, we could. Probably, we could hire
that person back sometime in the future, when they finally
get off of everything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If the employee --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If they run concurrently,
then this issue is -- is moot, because if they have more paid
sick leave time coming than 12 weeks, they're extended. If
they have less, they're protected.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if they have more --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If they run out of benefits,
they still -- their job is safe for them for that 12-week
period.
MS. HYDE: And the end of the 12 weeks, you can
make a determination that you're not going to get rid of
them, anyway.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
MS. HYDE: We had an employee --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Don't have to get rid of
them.
MS. HYDE: We had an employee that ran out.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, in order to right this ship at
this particular point in time, if we're going to go that
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
151
direction, we merely, in lieu of that particular provision in
the policy manual, for right now, until we rewrite the
policy, provide that upon the occurrence of -- of an event
under the Family Medical Leave Act, which qualifies an
employee to be eligible under that act, the employee shall
immediately be placed on family medical leave status, period.
And then if, in addition, they want to take sick leave,
vacation, whatever, that's covered under other provisions.
They can do that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or that this will run at the
same time as their sick leave or vacation. If they just --
that will straighten it out and solve all my problems.
MS. HYDE: Here is the proposed FMLA policy
revision. Now, I talked to Rex about it. I've gone online.
This is part of what you already have in your book, but the
addition is the military, which is huge, because they have
two types of entitlements. One is qualifying Exhibit C
leave, and that's for 12 weeks. Then you also have the
caregiver leave, which is up to 26 weeks. I went out and
talked to Harris County and looked at them, because they have
a lawyer that works for H.R., and so their lawyers have
~ already gone through it, and this is almost verbatim with
theirs. And what it does state in there, there are --
', there's protections. It tells you what type of treatments
there are, 'cause the treatments changed. What's a
2-9-09
152
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
qualifying event? What's the entitlement to leave? And then
it gets to what Rusty and I have been discussing, vacation
and sick leave, Page 75.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 75?
MS. HYDE: Mm-hmm. Employees on continuous FMLA
must exhaust all available vacation and sick leave before
taking unpaid FMLA leave. For intermittent FMLA -- I told
you; it was what we were discussing -- employees must exhaust
all vacation and sick leave before taking unpaid FMLA leave.
Sick leave is only applicable if the qualifying event is the
employee's own serious health condition, or if the employee
uses sick leave for the serious health condition of a spouse,
parent, or child, they can use their comp time as well, but
that is separate. And then on worker's compensation, that --
that is part of worker's compensation. It is. Immediately
upon going on worker's compensation, they are on FMLA,
whether anyone asks it, requests it. It doesn't matter if
it's just getting spit in the face; you're out for seven
days. Once you go to worker's comp, it's FMLA. The first
seven days, we can force them to take the paid leave, because
they're not being paid for those first seven days. And when
they go out on worker's comp, then it goes into all of this.
You know, if they fraudulently do FMLA, guess what? We can
fire them. If they have a second job while they're out on
FMLA, guess what? We can fire them.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
153
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I just have an issue with the
way it's worded on Page 75. If you look at it, it -- to me,
it's confusing. It's substitution of paid leave for unpaid
leave. It should run, period.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where are you?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What page are you on?
MS. HYDE: We talked about the word "substitution."
It is a confusing word. But the problem is that I just --
what's another word, Rex?
MR. EMERSON: I don't have a problem with the
paragraph, so --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How about "concurrent use"?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have no problem with the
paragraph, but it's contrary to what we're saying.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what I'm talking about.
It's saying --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I look at what it's
saying --
MR. EMERSON: It's not contrary.
(Several people talking at the same time; court
reporter interrupted.)
MR. EMERSON: It's not contrary to what you're
saying. What it says is you're going to burn your paid
leave, and then if you run out of paid leave and are still on
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
154
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, we're running
concurrent.
MR. EMERSON: You're not doing the flip-flop where
you're running unpaid and then paid.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. So, you're running
concurrent.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Both times start from day
I one and run.
MS. HYDE: I think what Rusty's saying is that it's
confusing to employees. The employees think that that means
that they can run with -- with, you know, taking all their
leave time off, and then when they exhaust that, they can go
on FMLA.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think it is confusing.
MS. HYDE: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: You could have it read, "on
continuous FMLA leave, must exhaust all available vacation
leave and sick leave, if applicable, before resuming any
unpaid FMLA leave."
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I like that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This could --
MR. EMERSON: But that wouldn't -- when you say
2-9-09
155
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
resuming, you're implying that they're jumping back in on the
back end, and they're not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. EMERSON: It's -- if it's one continuous
illness, it's one continuous run.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Couldn't you say --
MS. HYDE: How about if we just put a period there?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Couldn't you say FMLA leave
will commence upon notification of a qualifying illness,
regardless of whether the employee has accrued sick leave or
vacation, period?
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think -- you said
notification. I think you say occurrence.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay, occurrence.
JUDGE TINLEY: Of a qualifying --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A qualifying illness or
whatever -- event.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But it's just that it will
commence -- you know, FMLA leave will commence immediately
upon occurrence of a qualifying event, regardless of whether
there is any accrued sick or vacation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can put a period. The more
periods you put, the clearer it gets. Say if you have any
2-9-09
156
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
vacation or unpaid leave, that can run concurrently.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Will run concurrently.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Will. If you do that, that's
great, 'cause then it makes it very clear to employees that
it's not their choice any more.
MS. HYDE: Can someone read that back to me?
'Cause all I have is, "FMLA will commence upon occurrence..."
JUDGE TINLEY: Of a qualifying FMLA event.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Rex said he liked "shall"
instead of "will."
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Another part is, if an employee
has any unpaid vacation --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Sick leave.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- or sick leave, it shall run
concurrently.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Any -- any accrued vacation or
sick leave.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: With FMLA.
JUDGE TINLEY: With unpaid FMLA.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, with unpaid FMLA.
JUDGE TINLEY: Leave? If you're going to do that,
then you need to designate they're going to burn vacation
first and then their sick leave.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. Well, I mean, yeah.
Vacation, and then --
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
157
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You'd want sick first and then
vacation, wouldn't you?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
MR. EMERSON: Not as an employer.
MS. HYDE: Not as an employer, no, sir.
MR. EMERSON: Because you want them to burn all
their -- their vested benefits first. If they burn their
sick leave and you terminate them, then you got to turn
around and pay them cash for three weeks of accumulated
vacation time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but sick leave is sick
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Be fair.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I agree with Rex, but
if someone's sick, they should be able to use their sick
leave.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: First. Be fair.
~' COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MS. HYDE: Okay. So, you want sick leave first?
JUDGE TINLEY: We need to specify that sick leave,
', though, is only available for the employee or the designated
member of the family that you've got there. Some of those
other events under FMLA they shouldn't be able to use sick
leave for.
MS. HYDE: Right.
2-9-09
158
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Good point.
MR. EMERSON: That's -- I think the last paragraph
right here kind of -- that's what the intent is of that.
Excuse me, not the last paragraph, the last sentence of that
paragraph.
JUDGE TINLEY: Right. I think that needs to stay.
MS. HYDE: So, FMLA will commence upon occurrence
of a qualifying FMLA event, period.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then the --
MS. HYDE: If employee has any accrued sick leave
or vacation leave, they must utilize it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It will run concurrently.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will run concurrently with
FMLA.
MS. HYDE: It will run concurrent --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: With FMLA.
MS. HYDE: With FMLA.
MR. EMERSON: Shall.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Shall.
MS. HYDE: Shall?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. Don't leave it up
for grabs.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Shall.
MS. HYDE: Shall.
25 ~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then that title changes.
2-9-09
159
1
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 substitution of paid leave or concurrent use of paid
leave and unpaid FMLA leave.
MS. HYDE: Concurrent use?
JUDGE TINLEY: Of paid leave.
MS. HYDE: Of paid --
JUDGE TINLEY: And unpaid FMLA leave.
MS. HYDE: But then that's still going to give
them -- that's still going to make them think that they can
have unpaid FMLA leave after they've taken their paid leave.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They can if they only have two
weeks of paid leave, but they're getting 12 weeks of FMLA.
MS. HYDE: The title, though, that will go back to
what your employee gets so upset about. It's a request. I
don't have to; it says here that it's unpaid. It's paid or
-- and then I can do unpaid FMLA here. Concurrent use of
paid leave -- say that one more time?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Concurrent use of paid leave
and FMLA leave.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: "And." Not "or."
JUDGE TINLEY: Take the word "unpaid" out.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Concurrent use of paid leave
and FMLA leave. That's all right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You might have to put an
explanation on that, but --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Put an asterisk.
z-9-o9
160
1
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: For some people, you do. This
got to be --
', MS. HYDE: Heavy.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, it did.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Words that mean a whole lot.
MS. HYDE: If you go to Page 76, 'cause this --
this you'll need to know. I mean, the other part of it is,
if your administrator -- if H.R. is going to administrate it,
then H.R. needs to administrate it -- we need to know about
it. Because if you go to Page 76, employees who choose to
continue coverage while on unpaid FMLA leave must pay their
share of premiums, if any, under the group health plans then
in effect. The employee must pay their premiums for any
supplemental plans. The County bills employees on unpaid
FMLA one month in advance to maintain coverage. If the
County does not receive payment within 30 days of due date,
the coverage ends.
JUDGE TINLEY: What's the "if any" in there for?
MS. HYDE: I don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: Take it out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under the concurrent policy
we're talking about, that's covered. If they're running
simultaneously, concurrently, their health care coverage is
in place.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's why the term "unpaid" is so
2-9-09
161
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
important right there, Bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. And then this tells
them they have to continue paying their premium.
MS. HYDE: Right. I just want to make sure, 'cause
that's what we try to go over with them when they come in.
Our job is to try to make sure that they understand the
rules, which is why you have this. Because even if they're
~, not requesting it, we're filling it out and explaining it to
', them, and then we're trying to -- trying to explain to them
II~'~, why they have to go to the doctor to get certified. I'm not
II
~I a doctor. Rusty's not a doctor. Rex isn't a doctor.
~ SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Far as what she asked, the
I~, administrator, I think it should state that the Human
Resource officer for the county is the administrator of the
FMLA Act. I don't want to have anything to do with it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now, going back to something
the Judge just said, that he liked the word "unpaid" in
there. I don't like the word "unpaid," because, to me, once
~ you say unpaid FMLA, you're implying that there's paid FMLA,
and there isn't. The only way you get paid is if you're
using vacation or sick time.
MS. HYDE: Right. But whether the employee has
that or not, there's a couple of things that cover us. They
have to have 1,250 hours and worked a year, basically, for
the County for them to be even eligible. 'Cause we've had
2-9-09
162
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
several that weren't eligible, so now they're on unpaid,
'cause they haven't accrued anything. They're in month two
or three, and they don't have any sick time or vacation time
for 12 weeks.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, what you could do to
solve that, I think at the very end of it, where it says
Family Medical Leave Act, FMLA, you can put unpaid leave.
Because that's the county policy; you never pay for FMLA.
You pay for vacation, you pay for sick.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wouldn't be a bad idea to put
that here, and then leave out all the unpaid stuff.
MS. HYDE: That's going to confuse them. They're
going to think they get to take unpaid leave.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If they qualify, they do, for
12 weeks, if they don't have it. That's -- I mean, it -- the
County's not offering to pay for FMLA, period.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or the insurance premium.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or the insurance premium.
Only thing the County's offering to pay for is their sick and
vacation, as long as they have it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Including the insurance.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. So, FMLA for
Kerr County is unpaid.
MS. HYDE: But we're requiring them to use their
25 ~ paid leave.
2-9-09
163
1
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: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Concurrent means yes, they
both start at the same time.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's consistent.
MS. HYDE: You want me to put Family and Medical
Leave, FMLA, is unpaid?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I wouldn't. I'd leave it the
way it was.
MS. HYDE: Rex?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The law says it's unpaid.
MS. HYDE: No, it says that it might be unpaid.
They use a "may."
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I know, but this county --
because, as the Judge pointed out earlier, this county could
adopt a policy that says they're going to pay that 12 weeks.
This county has not done that, so I think it's unpaid and
should stay unpaid. All the employees know it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Who is advocating that?
JUDGE TINLEY: I was not advocating that. I said
that would be permissible under the law for us to do, so --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, sure, it's permissible,
but its unaffordable.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But you may -- there's a
point there; we may want to add a sentence that in the event
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
164
an employee utilizes all of his or her paid sick leave --
"if," all right? -- and FMLA is still -- you're still
eligible for FMLA, that portion of the FMLA left is unpaid.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The balance of the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The balance of the eligible
FMLA leave is unpaid.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is unpaid.
MS. HYDE: All paid leave, and there is...?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hi.
MS. HYDE: You said there is a remainder --
JUDGE TINLEY: All accrued -- well, wait a minute.
You can use -- you can use more than that.
MS. HYDE: "In the event an employee uses all paid
leave, and there is..." That's as far as I got.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And there is still an
unused portion of family -- FMLA, it's understood that that
portion is unpaid. Now, put the language -- whatever
language you want. That's the intent.
MS. HYDE: And there is still an unused portion of
FMLA -- I lost you. I'm trying to listen and write.
JUDGE TINLEY: Work on it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just saying that whatever --
whatever you don't have in benefits during the time of
FMLA --
25 ~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can go in my office and
2-9-09
165
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
work it out.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The balance of that is
~ unpaid.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you like that plan?
MS. HYDE: So, what do we do for today?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We're going to meet again
Friday.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, we're meeting Friday.
MS. HYDE: So, you want it Friday?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I mean, I think we -- I
think we need to do it as soon as possible. I think it's a
pretty good thing, but I think we also have been trying to do
all this in one big, fell swoop, haven't we, the policy
manual and all that? I mean, this --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How close are we to having
the personnel policy handbook?
MS. HYDE: Y'all have never asked for another
meeting. I asked the last time, and it was at y'ap's
discretion, so I haven't pushed it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just that one section.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Change just this one section,
or just that -- or just issue a court order saying effective
today or whatever, that all FML -- or FMLA will run
concurrently with all accrued sick or vacation. That will
solve the immediate problem until you get all the rest of the
2-9-09
166
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
__
new policies in there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we try and get this
thing done by Friday and attach this to a court order.
MS. HYDE: So, I need to be back here Friday. What
are we doing Friday?
JUDGE TINLEY: Won't that be fun?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 10:30 on Friday.
MS. HYDE: 10:30. I didn't know we had something
at 10:30.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They do now.
MS. HYDE: Oh.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You always enjoy this,
don't you?
MS. HYDE: I love it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If you can't be here, Eva,
I'll present it for you, don't worry.
MS. HYDE: No, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What I don't understand is how
y'all seem to be wanting the same thing, and y'all are
disagreeing with each other.
MS. HYDE: We're not really disagreeing, but he
wanted to put up the -- he wanted to put up the employees'
side, and he felt at first that we shouldn't force people to
take FMLA. But the problem was, employers got the short end
of that stick for so long, and so, you know, employers
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
167
weren't allowing folks, because that's what they thought the
law meant and said, to take all this sick time and stuff.
And there are a lot of good employees that have a lot of sick
time and vacation time.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That needs to be --
MS. HYDE: The employers were sitting there with
jobs open for a year. What would Mindy's office do without
-- without Beth for a year? What would y'all do without Jody
for a year?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, don't even go there.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They'd give her a temporary
position until that one came back, and kill the position.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there not a proposal in Congress
right now --
MS. HYDE: It is.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- to have FMLA required as paid
leave?
MS. HYDE: Right. And if the employee did not have
paid leave to utilize, it was up to the employer to pay that
leave.
JUDGE TINLEY: And that was for employers.
MS. HYDE: Which goes even more to yours about the
bad employee that uses all their sick time.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And at this point -- and this
is -- you know, I did want to -- to stress the employees'
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
168
part, and I didn't like the way the policy was written,
'cause it -- it gave exactly what we're changing, where it
said they had to use it. But I think that it is serious that
the County does adopt, one, a limitation on our sick leave
built up, accrued and that, as soon as possible. And, two,
if the federal government passes that where the 12 weeks is
paid, then I think you can pretty well do away with sick
leave, except for maybe, like, five personal days a year or
something.
MS. HYDE: Yeah.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Because then if it's anything
serious, they're getting paid for it anyhow.
MS. HYDE: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Have we whipped up on that
one about as much as we could? Okay. Does any member of the
Court have anything to offer in connection with matters that
were considered in executive session?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We were not in executive
session.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, I know. We're in open, but we
were in executive session.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We were.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
169
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're ahead of us, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: I thought I had a short memory. Do
you remember what you ate for lunch? Let the record reflect
Commissioner Oehler has this blank look on his face.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not saying anything.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anybody have anything to
offer in connection with the executive session matters that
we considered before lunch?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Can I make one quick comment?
Jail population, believe it or not, went down to 121 last
week.
JUDGE TINLEY: The Sheriff just announced he didn't
need a new jail.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I hope we never need a new
jail as long as I'm here, Judge, but that's the lowest I've
seen it in over five years.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, what's the cause of
that?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We got a new judge, and we got
D.A.'s pushing cases through.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yea.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is our little program --
~, SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not turning them loose on the
street. They're actually hearing cases and getting them
done.
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
170
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is our program functioning?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's not even up and running
yet. But it's fixing to be, and I think that will help. I
think we're -- the way things are going, I told both judges,
and I've had several meetings with them and the D.A.'s. I
really think that if they keep moving them like they are, and
we're dropping the number of days these people are getting
either tried or getting, you know, sent to prison, plea
bargains, whatever, but they're getting handled. They're not
just letting them out on the street, which I don't think they
should do either. But I would not doubt it, if they keep it
up, that we hit below 100 in that jail. And that just shows
the efficiency of running them through and not letting them
build up.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all we're looking
for.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And that, by itself, will save
this county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We don't have to do our
little program if it's --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That little program's going to
be what probably will push it down below that -- that mark.
I think you're going to need that program.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, do you think we're
going to get that going this year?
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
171
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Next 10, 12 years?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Somebody's going to put in --
they're already changing the policy on -- like, say a guy
gets put in jail on a drug charge, and normally he's waiting
three weeks before it goes to the Grand Jury, because we're
waiting on the lab submission to come back. When I met with
them last week, we're not waiting on labs submissions any
more. They're going straight to the D.A., and they're going
to -- if the guy wants to plead to it, especially if it's a
trace case, they'll let him plead on information without
having to sit in jail three weeks waiting on the lab results.
So, it's just -- the process is speeding everything up. Now,
this morning it was 142, but --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just after the weekend.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just after the weekend.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Full moon.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, full moon.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But it is looking a lot better
than I've seen it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nay.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll be adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 2:45 p.m.)
2-9-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
172
I
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 13th day of February,
2009.
JANNETT~~~PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
f ; ,~ , r
BY : ~u~~.
---------1---- -------------------
Kathy Bar4ik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
2-9-09
ORDER NO. 31180
BIDS FOR PHARMACEUTICAL PROVIDERS FOR KERR COUNTY INDIGENT
HEALTH PROGRAM
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Open and accept bids for pharmaceutical providers for the Kerr County Indigent Health
Program for the balance of fiscal year 2009 and fiscal year 2010, and refer to Indigent
Health Department for evaluation:
1. The Medicine Stop
2. Ackman Pharmacy
3. HEB, San Antonio
ORDER NO. 31181
KERR COUNTY WEBSITE LINK FOR "KERR COUNTY -WHERE THE MONEY
GOES" TO DETAIL KERR COUNTY EXPENDITURES
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve a "Kerr County -Where the Money Goes" link to the Kerr County website
which details expenditures of Kerr County Funds, excluding payroll and benefits-related
items, to start March 1, 2009.
ORDER NO. 31182
CERTIFICATION OF NON-AVAILABILITY OF ADEQUATE SPACE AND FUNDS
FOR THE 198 H JUDICIAL DISTRICT ADULT PROBATION DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Certification of non-availability of adequate space in county-owned
buildings or adequate funds to lease additional physical facilities, purchase additional
equipments, or pay for additional utilities by the Department for the 198th Judicial
District Adult Probation Department.
ORDER NO. 31183
RESOLUTION WITH CITY COUNCIL AND CITY OF KERRVILLE FOR USE OF
FEDERAL STIMULUS FUNDS FOR PHASE TWO OF AIRPORT
TAXIWAY/DRAINAGE PROJECT
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Adopt a Joint Resolution with the City Council and City of Kerrville supporting use of
federal stimulus funds for phase two of the airport taxiway/drainage project at the
Kerrville/Kerr County Municipal Airport.
ORDER NO. 3I l84
REPORT ON STATUS OF INVESTMENTS UNDER SECTION 887(b) OF THE
PROBATE CODE
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve Annual Reports for status of investments under Section 887(b) of the Probate
Code.
ORDER NO. 31185
NEW ROAD AND PARKING LOT FOR THE HILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY
MHMR CRISIS STABILIZATION UNIT
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Authorize Road & Bridge to build a new road and a 20 count parking lot for the Hill
Country Community MHMR Crisis Stabilization Unit.
ORDER NO. 31186
REVISION OF PECAN VALLEY NO. 2 SUBDIVISION, LOTS 2A-I AND 2A-2
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve setting a Public Hearing for March 23, 2009 at 10:05 a.m. for the Revision of
Plat for Lots 2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2 Subdivision, located in Precinct 2.
ORDER NO. 31187
SEAL COATING PROJECT FOR CITY STREETS
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve Road and Bridge Administrator to collaborate with City of Kerrville on seal
coating project for city streets.
ORDER NO. 31188
PUBLIC HEARING FOR 2009-2010 TEXAS COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT
COLONIA FUND
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve setting a Public Hearing for the 2009-2010 Texas Community Block Grant
Colonia Fund. for 5:30 p.m., Tuesday, February 24, 2009, in Commissioners' Courtroom,
Kerr County Courthouse, with Grantworks conducting the Public Hearing.
ORDER NO. 31189
JOINT RESOLUTIONS WITH CITY OF KERRVILLE
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve Joint Resolutions with the City of Kerrville for:
Airport Water Line
TxDOT Drainage Project
USDA Facility
River Dredging Project
ORDER NO. 31190
ACCEPT CODE RED PROPOSAL FOR MASS NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Accept Code Red Proposal for Mass Notification System, for an annual cost of
$25,250.00, and with the Contract subject to final review and approval by the County
Attorney.
ORDER NO. 31191
USE OF HILL COUNTY YOUTH EXHIBIT CENTER BY TEXAS WILD BUNCH
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioners Oehler/Baldwin, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve adding the Texas Wild Bunch to be added to the non-profit list for use of the
Exhibit Hall at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center.
ORDER NO. 31192
KERB COUNTY HISTORICAL COMMISSION'S ANNUAL REPORT
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Accept Kerr County Historical Commission's Annual Report, Membership Appointments
and Revised By-Laws.
ORDER NO. 31193
BURN BAN
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve re-establishing the burn ban for 90 days.
ORDER NO. 31194
USE OF CENTER POINT LIONS PARK BY SOUTHWEST TANDEM RALLY
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve use of Center Point Lions Park by Southwest Tandem Rally, Saturday, April 25,
2009.
ORDER NO. 31195
CONTRACT WITH PATTERSON & ASSOCIATES
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve extending the Contract for Investment Advisory Services with Patterson &
Associates for one year.
ORDER NO. 31196
EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT #1 BOARD
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve reappointing Kenneth Wood and Donald Oehler to serve on the Emergency
Services District #1 (ESD #1) Board for an additional 2 year term.
ORDER NO. 31197
KERR COUNTY CHILD SERVICES BOARD
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioners Williams/Oehler, the Court
unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve appointing Vicki Barron as a member of the Kerr County Child Services Board.
ORDER NO. 31198
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, came to be considered by the Court
various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	158,284.07
14-Fire Protection	$	15,000.00
15-Road & Bridge	$	30,877.24
16-208 Capital Projects	$	926.00
18-County Law Library	$	2,326.81
19-Public Library	$	33,333.33
21-Title IV-E	$	361.45
23-Juvenile State Aid Fund	$	5,125.00
27-Juv Intensive Prog-State	$	800.00
28-Records Mgmt & Preservation	$	1,270.00
35-JPO Grant G	$	31.50
39-Grant H-Misdeamor Div	$	3,100.00
50-Indigent Health Care	$	21,356.97
76-Juv Detention Facility	$	280.91
82-SO Law Enforcement	$	119.95
83-216th District Attorney	$	906.98
86-216t" CSCD	$	188.55
87-Community Service	$	242.00
TOTAL	$	274,530.76
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts.
ORDER NO. 31199
BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve paying the Budget Amendments as presented.
ORDER NO. 31200
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 9th day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Monthly Reports from:
Constable Pct # 1
Constable Pct #4
Constable Pct #4 Racial Profiling Report
County Clerk
Environmental Health