1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Monday, February 23, 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

2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I N D E X
February 23, 2009
--- Commissioners' Comments
1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
request from Kerrville/Kerr County Airport Board
for approval of appropriations up to $75,000
from existing airport fund cash balance
1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
presentation and resolution regarding support
of the 2010 Census
1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
request from the Hill Country Mounted Peace
Officers Association to be added to the nonprofit
list for a reduced rate at HCYEC
1.4 Presentation of the County Treasurer's monthly
report for January 2009 to Commissioners Court
for examination and acceptance
1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
courthouse square renovations
1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
dangerous wild animal ordinance
1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action
regarding West Law contract for Kerr County Jail
1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve Phase 1 of Boerne Falls/Privilege Creek
Ranches and release the letter of escrow
1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
name two private roads per 911 guidelines
1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
determine what funds to use to pay for costs of
building a new road and a 20-count parking lot
for the Hi11 Country Community MHMR Crisis
Stabilization Unit
1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
determine whether or not a policy change is
needed in Facilities Use Policy for HCYEC to
include all non-profits listed under the 501(c)
section of the IRS Code
PAGE
5
7
15
21
22
24
29
34
36
37
38
59
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
I N D E X (Continued)
February 23, 2009
1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
authorize application for 2009-2010 CDBG/Colonial
funding for OSSF replacement of failing systems
for low-income homeowners living in designated
areas where public sewer is not available
1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
census PSAP data and maps as prepared by AACOG
for Kerr County
1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
set fee paid to jurors as reimbursement
1.16 Update on Tyler Technologies issues
1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
request to approve "Texas Electronic Framework
Standard Service Level Agreement" and authorize
County Judge to sign same
1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve using 2008 capital loan software training
funds for Tax Assessor/Collector's Office for the
disbursement system
1.18 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
approve the Auditor instituting the purchasing
order system to comply with audit risk standards
and SAS 104-111 as required by the AICPA
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
Adjourned
PAGE
63
73
82
91
91
99
103
122
125
125
127
140
25
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse,
Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in
open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the
Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled and posted for this
time and date, Monday, February the 23rd, 2009, at 9a.m. It
is that time now. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Let's stand for a word of
prayer, and followed by the pledge of allegiance.
(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 a matter that is not a listed agenda item, feel free
to come forward at this time and tell us what's on your mind.
If you wish to be heard on an agenda item, we'd ask that you
fill out a participation form. They are located at the back
of the room, I think. If you have not filled out a
participation form and wish to be heard on any matter as it
comes up, why, get my attention in some manner; I'll see that
you do have the opportunity to be heard. But we do prefer
that you fill out a participation form. It helps me to know
2-23-09
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
that there's someone on that particular item that wants 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 let us know what's on
your mind. Seeing no one coming forward, we will move on
with our agenda. Do you have anything for us this morning,
Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Sure hope everybody will be
more careful with matches and welding and whatever. We had
another pretty good fire the other day out in the west end of
the county. It involved -- was mainly on the Ponderosa
Ranch, hit a little bit of the Y.O. and a little small bit of
what used to be the... Somewhere around 600, 700 acres
burned that afternoon. And there was a little problem, I
think, with dispatch on that deal. They couldn't seem to
call the county to help bring some water and fuel and things,
and so one of the fire chiefs called me, and it was amazing;
I called up Road and Bridge, and within just about 30
minutes, they showed up with 2,000 gallons of water and some
fuel. So, I don't know what the problem was with that, but I
understand the call was made three times to ask for
assistance, and wasn't passed on. But, anyway, it got
handled, got put out. We had all the firefighters from a lot
of different areas -- I'm not blaming you, Rusty.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I missed part of that. I
2-23-09
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
just --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You can't ask any questions,
either.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'll ask them after the
~ meeting.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But, anyway...
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 'Cause I know Austin was
calling me, so --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Junction got involved, and,
of course, Mountain Home and Divide and -- and Hunt, Ingram
all showed up very quickly and got it put out as quickly as
possible. We're lucky that it was an area where it wasn't
real hard to fight. So, anyway, that's what I have.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. I don't have
I
anything today, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Friday I spent the better part
of the day in Austin meeting with other hill country counties
and representatives and others, and Representative Rose has
filed HB 578, which is basically a mirror of the resolution
this Court passed and other counties have passed.
Representative Miller is on board to cosponsor that, and I've
2-23-09

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
talked with Harvey's office, and requesting that he cosponsor
it as well. The feeling is, by Paul Suggs, who knows a lot
more about the Legislature than I do, that if Harvey will
cosponsor it, there's a reasonably good chance it will get
out of the House this year, based on the speaker and the
committee chairs. So, that's kind of working along. And the
-- we're looking at possibly put it on the next agenda for us
to do another resolution citing that particular bill, and
also authorizing me to talk with other local entities
about -- regarding their support as well. But that's going.
And, actually, though Senator Fraser was not real positive
when I met with him, he evidently met with Jim Allison and
was fairly positive on his support as well, which is a little
bit of a surprise. There's another bill up there that
Senator Wentworth filed, the same bill that he has filed for
many years, and added some things that we've asked.
Statewide bill. We weren't real happy with the statewide
bill, but -- you know, so that's what he wants to do, so
that's working through the Senate side. We'll see where that
goes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Why don't we move on
with our agenda. First item on the agenda is a timed item
for 9 o'clock; it's a few minutes past that, to consider,
2-23-09
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
discuss, and take appropriate action on a request from the
Kerrville/Kerr County Airport Board for approval of
appropriations up to $75,000 from existing airport fund cash
balance. Mr. Bobertz?
MR. BOBERTZ: Thank you, Judge.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good to have you with us this
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Morning.
MR. BOBERTZ: As you see, we're requesting an
additional appropriations of $75,000. This is all for
improvements to our firefighting water supply. The fire
code -- big picture here, the fire code changed on us after
we put the lines in several years ago. We're now able to
provide firefighting water supply to the great -- a large
area of leasable land, but only up to about 900 gallons per
minute. New fire code calls for 1,500 gallons a minute. So,
until we fix that problem, a large area of leasable land is,
for all practical purposes, unleasable at the airport. So,
we need to find a way to fix this problem, first step being
to do the necessary engineering. In our deliberations in the
Airport Board, a number of possible ways to skin that cat
have developed, so we need an engineering study to pick the
most viable alternative and then to do the design work so
that we're ready to go when we can fund project itself.
You see in the material you have that we do have
2-23-09
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
funding for $75,000 left over from -- or available in cash
balance. This cash balance sort of emerged, from the murk in
my mind, anyway, only about three weeks ago. Having grown up
in a corporate environment, my world, at the end of the
budget year, if you didn't spend it, it was gone. And in
this world, apparently if you have excess revenue and/or
underrun your authorized expenditures, that -- that cash goes
into a general pot, and it's there for future use. So, we do
have the funding to spend on the -- to fund the $75,000
request, and we would respectfully request that authorization
this morning.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Roger, you may have
answered the question I have in my mind, but I want to make
sure. I think I understood you to say that the 75,000 is to
examine alternatives and then do the engineering --
MR. BOBERTZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- on the acceptable
alternatives?
MR. BOBERTZ: That's correct, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Because I still have
a little reservation in my mind as to the alternative that's
being proposed as being the most practical, cost-effective.
So, you're going to examine other alternatives as well?
MR. BOBERTZ: Yes, we are. And there's another
alternative -- the one that was on deck for a while was -- we
z-z3-og
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
have a water line running down 27 and another one running
down the access road, and the alternative on deck was to hook
these two together --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
MR. BOBERTZ: -- by coming under the runway and the
taxiway. And that -- that would at least help the problem.
There's another alternative that surfaced that makes a lot
more sense, I think, and it's -- it came from a discussion
between Tom Moser, who's on the Airport Board, and Charlie
Hastings, the City engineer -- excuse me, Director of Public
Works. And this involves running a line instead from the
vicinity of Mooney under that runway and putting stubs off it
to come down into the leasable land. It looks like it will
be a lot less expensive to do, but it needs to be designed,
and it also needs to be thoroughly evaluated from an
engineering standpoint.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, that would tell the
Court that -- in effect, that the $600,000 that has been
estimated -- thrown around as an estimated cost to rectify
the problem may be overstating the amount needed? Is that a
possibility?
MR. BOBERTZ: Maybe, yes. Until -- pending the
result of the study.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
MR. BOBERTZ: I'd say somewhere between "maybe" and
2-23-09
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
"probably."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, okay. There's a
quantum leap there most times.
JUDGE TINLEY: Instead of a WAG, that's a SWAG.
MR. BOBERTZ: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: A scientific WAG.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Roger, the 75,000, as I recall,
II is based on an estimated percentage, which is the way a lot
of these things run.
MR. BOBERTZ: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If the cost comes in under --
this is kind of a not-to-exceed type number. I mean, it
could be -- 75,000 may be on the high side for the
engineering?
MR. BOBERTZ: It may be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just won't know until --
MR. BOBERTZ: Also, the same terminology would
apply, I think.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Another question I
have -- and I certainly have, I think, no problem with this
funding at all, but the only concern I have is that the
Airport Board look at your fund balance and make sure that
y'all think this is the best way to use it. And the reason
I'm bringing that up is, I fear that TexDOT may be wanting to
accelerate the other projects out there, the drainage project
2-23-09
I2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a little bit, and that funding is not set aside by either the
County or the City at this point.
MR. BOBERTZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or a match, and the match will
be substantially less if it's accelerated, which is a really
good thing. But I -- we need to make sure that this is the
-- y'all look at both those projects together and figure out
the priorities as to which one you think that fund balance is
best used at, if needed. Hopefully we can come up with some
other funding for one or both of them, but --
MR. BOBERTZ: Hopefully.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- I'm certainly in support.
MR. BOBERTZ: It's an interesting world this month.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Bobertz, as I'm sure you're
aware, there has -- this particular project has been included
with others for stimulus funding.
MR. BOBERTZ: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: If, in fact, stimulus funding is
acquired for this project, would any part of this funding
possibly be reimbursable out of that funding so as to get it
back into your -- into your reserve fund balance?
MR. BOBERTZ: I do not know the answer to that
question, Judge. I'm sorry. I can find out. But --
JUDGE TINLEY: It'd be nice.
2-23-09
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
MR. BOBERTZ: It sure would.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: As kind of a follow-up to that
a little bit, one of the reasons I think the Airport Board is
progressing at the speed they are is that if that stimulus
funding does happen, it needs to be, quote, "shovel ready,"
and it can't be shovel ready until the engineering's done.
MR. BOBERTZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I imagine the -- while I
don't know the answer, Judge, it would seem reasonable that
in any of the projects that stimulus money is used for, there
has to be acceptable engineering so that the projects can
move forward, so I'm with you on that. If that comes down
the pike, we should -- we should put it back in the reserves
if that happens.
MR. BOBERTZ: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would you be comfortable
with a not-to-exceed motion of 75?
MR. BOBERTZ: I would. I'm advised that
authorizations like this need to be for a fixed amount, but
if that's not true, that's fine by me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we can do, you know,
"not to exceed" or we can do 75, or we could do 55.
MR. BOBERTZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Or we could do 25.
2-23-09
14
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
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move that we
approve the request of the Airport Board for -- to take
reserves -- some of their existing reserves for engineering
on the airport water line improvement project not to exceed
$75,000.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is -- is this fund -- I saw
the Auditor come in, I thought. Is this fund kept at the
county?
MS. HARGIS: No, it's not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So -- okay, that's all. I'm
going to take your word for it, then, that that money's
there. And why are we doing it if it's not here?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Has to be both of us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a budget amendment.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, the money is in the city
coffers?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's in the airport fund, which
the City --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that amount's in there?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
2-23-09
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. All right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussions 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,
I Mr. Bobertz.
MR. BOBERTZ: Thank you, Judge. Thank you,
Commissioners.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you for being here. Let's
move to our 9:05 timed item. It is past that now, to
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
presentation and resolution regarding support of the 2010
census. Mr. Sierra and Ms. Ochoa with the census people are
here with us. Good morning.
MR. SIERRA: Good morning, sir. My name is Ken
Sierra. I'm a partnership specialist with the U.S. Census
Bureau. I want to thank you for allowing me the opportunity
to address the Court this morning. As y'all know, the census
is a very important tool that is used by government. It's
used for the apportionment of seats for the House of
Representatives. The census data is also used to establish
the funds that are allocated -- federal funds that are
2-23-09
I6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
allocated on an annual basis. Currently, it's at 300 billion
dollars annually. And it's also used for redistricting. So,
the statistics that come out of this census at the -- once
the data's collected, is used for redistricting, and in the
different communities. Now, Kerr County's response rate for
census 2000 was 65 percent. Of all the possible -- of the
100 percent that we could have received in terms of -- of
data, we only received 65 percent response rate.
As a partnership specialist, what I've been
chartered to do, or what my main goal is to work with the
communities, work with Kerr County to develop an awareness
and to increase our response rate for this upcoming census.
Now, that's done by combining -- in my case, how I achieve
this is by combining the strengths of the local government,
community organizations, faith-based organizations, the
schools, media, and businesses within the community, work
with them to see if I could get support and get the word out
to all the levels of the community, to all the people as much
as possible within -- within Kerr County. Now, in order to
achieve this goal, there's a couple of things that I could
do. Number one is to try to establish complete count
committees within the county, and also to create partnerships
with all these agencies.
The immediate impact of my work and my effort here
and the census work is that we're creating jobs in the
2-23-09
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
community level, the communities. Right now, we're in a
hiring campaign. It's through a -- it's through a toll-free
number, (866) 861-2010. We're starting to hire people within
the communities. The idea is that in order to get the word
out, it's best if we use people within the community.
Instead of bringing in individuals from San Antonio or
Austin, it would be best if we hired people within the
community, and they then become the work force and try to get
the -- the word out for this census in April 2010. With this
effort of hiring people then comes the issue of getting
facilities to train them and to -- and to test them. It's
not fair to offer a job opportunity here in, for example,
Kerrville, and then tell them you need to go to San Antonio
to get tested. So, one of the initiatives that I have is to
go throughout the communities and try to find facilities that
can be used in support of the -- the hiring process within
the different townships and different communities.
In conclusion, this year -- this coming census is
an easier census than the 2000 census. They used to have
what was called the short form and the long form. This is a
short form. It's a 10-question census. Probably take 10
minutes to fill out, and the impact's going to be for the
next 10 years. What I would want from the Court is to see if
I could get a signed resolution in support of the 2010 census
within Kerr County, and I would work with the County to try
2-23-09
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to -- to increase the awareness among the population, with
the ultimate goal of getting a better response rate in the
coming year. Pending any questions, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Sierra, is there
somebody out there that thinks that we're not going to
participate in the census? Or -- I mean, I don't understand
why we're doing this.
MR. SIERRA: Well, as we --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are we trying to convince
someone of something or what?
MR. SIERRA: As we -- as we start this initiative
-- again, like I said, I was hired to work with the counties.
And as I come through and visit with the counties, what I'm
trying to do is establish partnerships, and -- that I could
have recorded; that I could say, "Yes, Kerrville is
supporting the census, and yes, we are working towards the
goal of trying to get a better response rate." Is there
somebody saying that Kerrville didn't answer? The truth is,
sir, within the -- the immediate counties, Kerrville had the
best response rate. 65 percent was the best response rate
within this area here. When I say "this area," I'm comparing
Bandera, Real -- Bexar? The response rate was -- was very
good, so there's not an issue that we -- that Kerr --
Kerrville or Kerr County is not supporting this. As a matter
of fact, they did very good. However, we're trying to get a
2-23-09
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
better response rate this coming census. That's all.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you would take our -- I
don't want to take up the whole time here, but I'm just
really confused about this. You're going to take our
resolution, then, and go to other agencies or other companies
or other businesses in -- in this community and say, "Hey,
these guys up at the courthouse are going to participate in
the census," like we always do, "so I want you to as well"?
Is that -- is that what you're saying?
MR. SIERRA: No, sir. What I'm saying is, I would
like the highest elected officials of the county to show
their support and that we would have this record --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm lost.
MR. SIERRA: -- that you are supporting the census.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you.
MR. SIERRA: The 2010 census.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Basically, it's publicity.
This is a publicity action. We're just saying that we think
this -- we're just saying as a Court that the census is
important, and it gives the -- the press an opportunity to
have a story.
MS. OCHOA: It is -- you know, the message about it
being important, easy, and safe coming from the community,
from elected officials, from civic leaders, from pastors,
2-23-09
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ministers, from people that provide services to their own
community, is a message that can -- can be trusted. And if
the people are hearing from the community leaders that this
is important to the community, then we feel that we'll get a
higher response rate. And the response rate deals only with
when we send out the questionnaire, and, like, we'll do that
in March of 2010. Census data is April the 1st. By the
middle of April, we'll determine how many households have not
returned the questionnaires. Then we need to hire more
people to go back and knock on those doors to get those
questionnaires. And, so, if we can get the whole community
involved in responding to the questionnaires when they get --
they first get it, and -- you know, because there's many
factors. People are busy. They get a lot of -- you know,
they're going to receive a notice saying the questionnaire --
you're going to receive the questionnaire. You're going to
then get the questionnaire. Then you get a reminder, "Have
you filled out the questionnaire?" Because we know that
people are busy. They receive a lot of bulk mail. There are
other priorities. There's a fear factor that -- not
believing the federal government, not believing that it is
not safe to respond. So, we are looking at the whole -- the
whole community having a reason to respond, and it starts at
your level.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move approval of the
2-23-09
21
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
resolution as presented.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the resolution as presented. Question or
discussion on that motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And that's going to authorize
you to sign the resolution as well.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion
on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 3, a timed item for 9:15. Consider, discuss, and
~~ take appropriate action on a request from the Hill Country
Mounted Peace Officers Association to be added to the
nonprofit list for a reduced rate at the Hill Country Youth
Exhibit Center. Mr. Mayberry?
MR. MAYBERRY: Judge Tinley, Commissioners, good
morning. My name is Stephen Mayberry. I'm the
secretary/treasurer of the Hill Country Mounted Peace
Officers Association. Thank you for your time this morning.
Just real briefly, I have with me a copy of our tax
determination letter from the I.R.S., and would request that
2-23-09
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
we be considered to be added to the charitable list so that
we can lease from the Youth Exhibition Center.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Y'all are a 501(c)(3)?
MR. MAYBERRY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
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.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank you,
Mr. Mayberry.
MR. MAYBERRY: Fantastic. Thank y'all very much.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll move to Item 4, a presentation
of the County Treasurer's monthly report for January 2009 to
Commissioners Court for the Court's examination and
acceptance. Good morning, Ms. Williams.
MS. WILLIAMS: Good morning, gentlemen. How are
you'?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Very well, thank you.
MS. WILLIAMS: Good. You have in front of you the
January Treasurer's report. If there are any questions, I
would try my best to answer them for you.
2-23-09
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept the Treasurer's
report as presented.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mindy, is this a monthly --
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We do this every month?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, it has to be filed every month.
Didn't realize that until some time ago.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I remember when you
uncovered it. It's just kind of strange.
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are our tax collections -- if
you know the answer; I don't know, maybe Diane is the person
to ask. Maybe Jeannie. Are we on target? I mean, did we
get --
MS. HARGIS: We don't know yet, because we haven't
got all the February cash receipts in yet. And it'll be a
while. I mean, we just got 8 million from January, but I
haven't seen the report yet to be able to answer that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we'll know probably in
March how we're doing?
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
2-~3-09
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. How much? All right,
thank you.
MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion on
the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 5; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on
the courthouse square renovation. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda kind
of as an update for those that have been seeing -- Tim and
his crew have been out there doing all kinds of things. Even
received an e-mail from the public about one of the items.
But the main reason it's on the -- I put it on the agenda is,
as we all know, we're in the middle of a pretty bad drought.
The plan has been for -- since budget time, to plant new sod
on the area inside the driveway this spring, and I think
Tim's on target to do that. I've gotten him in touch with
some sod companies, and I think he's planning on -- he
himself is planning to plant probably mid-March. And I just
wanted to make sure .t hat the Court was behind it, considering
the -- there may be a little bit of -- of flak potentially
2-23-09
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
from some of the public from us planting sod in the middle of
a drought. What is being -- the type of sod is a -- one of
~ the more drought-tolerant sods, zoysia, as well on the
conditions we have around the courthouse. And -- but I just
wanted to kind of put it on the agenda to make sure the
Court's ready to proceed with that. Even though we're in a
drought, this is still the best time of the year to plant.
If we're going to get any -- if we're going -- the drought's
going to continue, the spring will be most likely to get the
rain. And it doesn't take that much water to get sod
established; generally two to three weeks of heavy water,
then you're home free. So, I just wanted to make sure that
no one had any issues.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm on board.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question, not
necessarily about the sod, but about the renovations in the
area -- the area right outside the main door here where we
gather sometimes for events is in pretty sad need of repair.
Is that -- is that going to be resurfaced? Is that part of
the plan?
MR. BOLLIER: Are you talking about the paved area?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
MR. BOLLIER: That's not part of the plan at this
time, no, sir.
25 ~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think that there -- my
2-23-09
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
guess is that there will be funds available --
MR. BOLLIER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- after, 'cause Tim is doing
everything in-house, basically. And so I think -- I mean,
right near what's budgeted.
MR. BOLLIER: Right now, the main thing we're
working on is the yard itself, but as soon as we get all that
done, then, yes, sir, I do want to come in there and do
something with that paved area.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I knew you'd find the
answer.
MR. BOLLIER: Well, I kept -- I saw you looking at
me, so I knew. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'd encouraged that earlier,
too. You're not alone.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Tim.
MR. BOLLIER: You're welcome, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: There was a drainage issue out there
as to that particular area, and Tim has found a resolution to
that.
MR. BOLLIER: It is fixed.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good.
MR. BOLLIER: Both sides are fixed now. At one
time, we couldn't get any water through one side. As you're
looking at the old hospital over there, on the right-hand
2-23-09
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
side as it runs out to the curb, we couldn't get any water
through there. We couldn't figure out why. Well, they used
old clay pipe, and I can't tell you how old that is, but that
clay pipe is no longer between where the horseshoe is on the
inside, past the sidewalk out there. That's all green sewer
pipe out there, 6-inch sewer pipe. We shouldn't have any
problems any more. We went to the -- even to the lengths to
put -- I forget what it's called -- some rabbit wire around
the end of it so the leaves and stuff won't get in it,
because that's actually what clogged it all up. The leaves
and sticks got in there and we couldn't break it loose.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think just -- I think the
Court's aware of it, so -- and the public is here as well.
The whole project is going to be much less maintenance cost
and water cost long-term, going with -- a lot of the shrubs
and the kind of hodgepodge of plantings are being eliminated
with a bunch more simple things. The mulch around the trees,
which everyone has seen, we received an e-mail on the proper
way to mulch trees. The -- you know, that helps with
maintenance. It also helps with the water retention around
the trees and the health of the trees. So, I think
everything we're doing is going to, long-term, pay for
itself. I think we'll have, for the first time since I've
been a commissioner, and probably long before that, have a
courthouse square that really looks nice.
2-23-09
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you know anybody that
would comment on the memorial markers, by any chance?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was getting ready to.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, you were?
MR. LUTHER: I was too.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. Oh, I am shocked.
MR. LUTHER: Are you?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think the repositioning
of those markers is great. They look good there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Looks fantastic.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it was pretty heavy. I
understand -- I think Road and Bridge had a bit of a feat
getting that out of the ground and over here.
MR. BOLLIER: Yeah, we did.
JUDGE TINLEY: They did an excellent job, though.
They got that thing set in there nicely, and Tim had it all
prepared, and we got the other two markers there, which is
probably the best place for everything, the way it's situated
now. And they did -- when we get through, it's really going
to be stellar. You had a comment?
MR. LUTHER: Oh, Judge Tinley, members of the
Commission, I had seen it this weekend, and just wanted to
come down this morning and say thank you on behalf of all the
members of the county Historical Commission. I think it
looks really great. And, Tim, I want to thank you for the
2-23-09
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
excellent job. And I even did a little check-up on the
marker that's out by the street that TexDOT is going to move
out to Camp Verde, and I understand that it's cracked or --
MR. BOLLIER: Got a crack down where the pipe comes
up. It's been there, about where it fits onto the pipe,
there's a crack up on the top, and I don't know that you can
fix that.
MR. LUTHER: It's probably been hit by a car, so
we're going to move it out of the way as soon as we can get
that arranged. And I would ask you to talk to your staff
about arranging a time that we could rededicate these markers
with a brief ceremony in front of the courthouse, but thank
you very much for your kind cooperation on that.
MR. BOLLIER: I just want to add that Mr. Leonard
Odom back there, he needs some thank-you's too, 'cause he --
he played a great part in moving it. Without his guys and
his equipment, we couldn't have never got to move it.
MR. LUTHER: Thank you, Mr. Odom.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Big chunk of granite.
MR. BOLLIER: That's a big hunk of granite, believe
I me.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Dr. Luther. Leonard,
I thank you for a great -- great job. Anything else on that
~I
particular item? Let's move on to Item 6; to consider,
I, discuss, and take appropriate action on dangerous wild animal
2-23-09
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ordinance. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I placed this on this
agenda. I believe we had a little deal with a dangerous wild
animal that kind of escaped the cage in the not too distant
past, and I feel like that maybe it's time, with our
population growing and this land getting cut up in smaller
pieces, and it's just not a good idea to allow any more of
that sort of thing to come into the county. I want to
propose that -- that we grandfather the ones that are already
here; the ones that are licensed, permitted, and are housed
in the proper facilities, to grandfather those, and to ban
all others that are on this list of dangerous wild animals to
be brought into the county from this point forward.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can I ask a question?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Under -- under -- what law
have we been functioning under all these years?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before today?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It was adopted in 2001, and I
believe the section is 822, and it was added in the 2001
Legislature, 77th Legislature. Chapter 54, Section 1,
effective September 2001.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And does that talk about --
does that talk about things that the County would do as far
2-23-09
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
as registration and those kinds of things? We had this
discussion, kind of, --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- a couple weeks ago.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's all spelled out with
what -- what people have to do, and to this point, to have
had animals here, and it requires inspection by our Animal
I Control.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And have we been doing that?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not as well as we should
have, but I believe that with this last incident, things are
going to be done exactly according to the way the law
requires.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a hard time of doing
something new when we really haven't been taking care of
things that have been on the books for a long time. Now, if
we're not taking care of the business at hand, why would we
want to add a new law on there that we may or may not live
with? I mean, I'm not sure.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, the only addition would
be just to ban them from coming any more, so it'll actually
be a lot easier than trying to police more coming in.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It would be easier.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I acknowledge there are very
few right now that are actually licensed and permitted.
2-23-09
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
And --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My recollection last time we
did this is that we held a public hearing on this before we
changed -- changed it. You know, I'd be in favor of doing
that. And also -- you know, I have rio problem of doing it; I
think it's probably a good idea, and probably time to do it,
like you said. But I think, you know, we ought to offer the
public an opportunity to -- you know, to give their opinion
on it, and also have the actual new ordinance so we can
eliminate the old stuff out of the books and have actually
one new court order that sets the new --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There actually will be one
change.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that was what I was
going to comment .
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Everything else remains the
same as we've been upgrading them, with one change. And if
you'd like to have a public hearing, I'm sure not in
', opposition to that. I don't believe -- Rex, the law doesn't
require that we have a public hearing on this, according to
what you gave me.
MR. EMERSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just remember we did it last
time.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So if that's what you'd like
2-23-09
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
to do, we can put it on -- we can post a public hearing for
maybe the second meeting in March; give us ample time.
JUDGE TINLEY: How are we going to -- how are we
going to determine who's grandfathered and who the existing
folks are?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The ones that presently have
permits and own animals that are here now. If they don't --
you know, ones we find out that we didn't know about, that's
a good question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I think that's the reason
for the public hearing. They're on notice then, and if they
don't have it registered, you know --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Give them 30 days to do so,
and after that time, I'll be glad to do a public hearing.
Then we can have it more definite and have it spelled out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd like to see a public
hearing. I'd also like to see the revised order --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- in terms of what we're
planning and how we're doing it, and blab, blab, blab.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay, that's fine with me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we set a public hearing
under this agenda item?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Need to do the second meeting
in --
2-23-09
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: March.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: In March. What would that
be?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 24th? 26th?
MS. GRINSTEAD: 23rd.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 23rd.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We would have got there
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We need to order that. I
move that we set the public hearing for 10 o'clock on
March 23rd on the dangerous wild animal --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- regulations.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second to set
a public hearing for March 23rd, 2009, at 10 a.m., on the
issue of amending or changing or otherwise modifying the
current dangerous wild animal order. 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. Let's move
to Item 7; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
regarding the West Law contract for the Kerr County Jail.
2-23-09
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What this actually is is our
law library. We have to have one sort or another. We've had
one for a number of years now, and the contract needs to be
renewed. It's not paid for out of county funds at all; it's
paid for out of proceeds from inmate commissary account. But
if we need the approval of the Court, I still need to pull
this agenda item for now, because Rex and I still have an
issue over the contract that West Law sent. It doesn't
really give us a termination clause in there, either after
one year or -- unless there's a major breach of some sort, we
can't get out of it. So, we're not going to approve it yet
until we can work on it a little bit more.
JUDGE TINLEY: Couple questions, Sheriff. Number
one, the source of funding is -- is the commissary earnings,
which is essentially generated by the inmates themselves?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, it's inmate money. It's
proceeds from the commissary, which by law has to be spent
back on the inmates, and then we also are required to
provide, you know, a law library type deal, so this is a way
that they pay for their own law library.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And this is not through the
hard-bound volumes, but rather through the -- the information
system that West provides -- West-Thomson provides?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, it's their software
group. We provide the computer and a secure location in the
2-23-09
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
jail, and then their program's downloaded into that computer.
That gives the inmates the access to the stuff they need to
research.
JUDGE TINLEY: So, the amount of space you're
required to have available is considerably decreased, as
~I, opposed to having all the hard-bound volumes out there that
you used to have to maintain?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The amount of space is
decreased, and the cost is decreased. Because you, being an
attorney, know what the cost is of the hard-bound books, and
we went away from the hardback books a number of years ago.
We've been using this, but now they've changed a lot of
stuff, and we're not sure at this point whether we'll go with
Westlaw or Lexis-Nexis. We're getting both of them on their
correctional site. But until we can get the details in the
contract worked out, I need to pull it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. You're going to bring it
back?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We'll bring it back.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Thank you, sir. Let's
take up Item 8, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate
action to approve Phase 1 of Boerne Falls/Privilege Creek
Ranches and release the letter of escrow. Mr. Odom. Good
~ morning, sir.
25 ~ MR. ODOM: Good morning, sir. Boerne
2-23-09
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
37
Falls-slash-Privilege Creek Ranches, it's -- Phase 1 has been
completed. The roads are going to be privately maintained.
At this time, we ask the Court to approve the Boerne
Falls/Privilege Creek Ranches, Phase 1, and release the
letter of escrow, G.F. Number 070721K, as in kilo, in the
amount of $349,082.53, that is to expire July the 24th, 2009.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on that
motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your
right hand.
(Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Oehler voted
in favor of the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let the
record reflect that Commissioner Letz did not participate or
vote on the matter.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As usual. We've got to do
everything. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 9; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to name two private
roads per 911 guidelines, located in Precinct 3 and Precinct
4.
2-23-09
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
I2
13
14
15
I6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The requested road name in
Precinct 3 is Barbarosa Trail North. This road is currently
unnamed. The location of this road is Cypress Creek to
Holekamp Road. The proposed Barbarosa Trail is off of
Holekamp Road. Requested road name change in 4 is Reata
Ridge Road Northwest. Both of these unnamed roads meet Kerr
911 guidelines, and at this time, we ask for your approval of
Barbarosa Trail North and Reata Ridge Northwest.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. 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. Let's move
to Item 10; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
determine what funds to use to pay for the costs of building
of a road and 20-count parking lot for Hill Country Community
M.H.M.R. Crisis Stabilization Unit. I put this back on the
agenda in order that we might determine the source of funds
for the approval of that item, which has previously been
given. Estimated cost for the project, Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Somewhere in the -- around 10,000, but
2-23-09
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it may go less than that, because I have a source of base
material that I have to screen that the City is letting us
use, so the only thing would be the oil and the aggregate,
which would be around $5,000. Ours is force accounting, so
therefore there's no cost unless there's a charge to the
mental health for time and equipment. But other than that, I
should be able to do a 20-count parking lot and that road
within my line items, which would be the emulsion line item
and the aggregate line item, and there should be savings. We
won't know until the 9th of March, or the first meeting in
March; we'll have our bids open and we'll have a better idea
of what our -- our funds will be left at that point. But I
feel quite confident that we would have enough to do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: In your current budget?
MR. ODOM: In my current budget.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And that would be, then, the
source of funds of the emulsion and the trap rock line items?
MR. ODOM: Right. The base is something over -- up
Spur 100, and we'll have to screen out and use, which we've
been doing, and we have discussed that this morning in our
supervisor meeting, so that was a cost factor there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, all that says we don't need
to do anything, 'cause this is going to come out of your
current budget.
MR. ODOM: It will come out of my current budget
2-23-09
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
unless the Court has an objection to it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the City, I think, is --
last time we talked about the City providing something for
us, doing some work for them, and this is kind of part of
that, isn't it?
MR. ODOM: Well, that's not what I had in mind,
but... (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a step.
MR. ODOM: It is a step. It is a step.
JUDGE TINLEY: Patience, patience.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How many -- I'm not sure I
understand everything I know about this. The stabilization
unit is a new program out there, and there's how many beds?
JUDGE TINLEY: Sixteen.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sixteen beds. And that is
for the entire M.H.M.R. cachement area, right? Those beds.
And if we -- we get somebody that's committed to this unit
over there, and we take a patient over there and it's full,
then we -- I'm not sure what Rusty does with that person any
more; if he just drops them off and lets M.H.M.R. take care
of their own business, or if he continues to go to Dallas or
Fort Worth or the next available bed in the M.H.M.R. system.
I don't -- I'm not sure what he does. But my point is, if
that thing is full and there is not a bed for Kerr County
citizens, what we're doing is, we're asking the citizens of
2-23-09
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Kerr County, the taxpayers of Kerr County, to build a road
and a parking lot for folks that live somewhere else; Del
Rio, Uvalde, wherever the rest of the cachement area is.
That's not right, and it's not fair, and I'm opposed to this.
Plus it brings into question this issue of does -- is the --
are these patients -- are they M.H.M.R.'s or are they Kerr
County`s? And I understand that there is a knock-down,
drag-out in Austin over that issue. There was lots of
sheriffs up there last week talking about this, and so, you
know, we're asking the taxpayers of Kerr County to build a
road and a parking lot for people in other counties. It's
just -- it just doesn't seem right to me. Tell me where I'm
~ wrong.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know that -- don't know that
you are wrong. The situation we have now is the current beds
that are being utilized on a temporary and interim basis at
Kerrville State Hospital have already been designated as
forensic beds on a permanent basis. That being the case,
without the crisis stabilization unit, there may not be
anyplace to carry Kerr County -- or anybody within that
cachement area, that 19-county cachement area. It -- it may
be totally unavailable for them to come to Kerr County at all
without that crisis stabilization unit. There is continuing
pressure, because of liability issues primarily in north
Texas, Dallas, for -- for an increase in these forensic beds,
2-23-09
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and that's what's resulted in the designation of these beds
as being forensic beds. So, without the crisis stabilization
unit, we may not have any facility available for inpatient
admission in Kerr County at all in the -- in the very near
future without this crisis stabilization unit.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, was the -- is the
entire complement of beds at Kerrville State Hospital now
~ designated as forensic?
JUDGE TINLEY: That is correct, on a permanent
I basis.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The entire complement?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And when this issue came
before the Legislature, I guess it was for funding to build
this subordinate I6-bed unit, right? Was there a commitment
on the part of Kerr County to do the road and the parking lot
if the State committed the funds for the other --
JUDGE TINLEY: Very early on, when the -- when the
bill was pending before the Legislature -- and Mr. Weden, who
is the operations officer with Hill Country Community
M.H.M.R., is here and probably has more details on that.
When -- when the concept was originally being vetted and
proposed in the Legislature, and the funding requested for
the rehab of a -- of a building there at Kerrville State
Hospital, they came to us at that time asking for Kerr
2-23-09
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
County's participation on the basis of building the roadway.
At that time, Leonard and I went out and looked, and at that
point in time they were looking at coming in off of Texas
', Drive around a little lake or drainage impoundment out there,
which would have been a longer -- longer roadway. I think
Leonard had estimated material costs at $10,000 to
$12,000, --
MR. ODOM: Something like that.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- if I recall.
MR. ODOM: Years ago.
JUDGE TINLEY: Three years ago.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Three or maybe more, a little bit
more. And the Court at that time suggested that we'd be
willing to participate. I brought the matter before the
Court, and until they got the funding for the M.H.M.R.
facility, we didn't know what was going to happen. But all
of this arose out of the action that happened in early 2005,
when those beds -- all the beds at Kerrville State Hospital
were designated forensic. And then Representative
Hilderbran, shortly after that, obtained an interim use from
the Department of State Health Services, I believe it's
called now, to utilize some of those beds out there for civil
commitment purposes. That's that interim basis that we've
been able to use that facility for civil commitments.
2-23-09
44
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm -- I'm all for the
crisis stabilization unit. That's a wonderful thing and, you
know, M.H.M.R.'s doing their job. Pretty simple. It would
make it -- you know, I can see the partnership if M.H.M.R.
would purchase the material and us do the work. I can see
that -- I can see that as a partnership. But us providing
the material and the labor, I -- that's not -- that's not a
partnership of any sort. We have -- we have all kinds of
private roads in the community, and when there's a bad rain
and somebody needs an ambulance, we have to send Road and
Bridge out there to fix the road so people can get in and
out, and here we want to do something for the state of Texas
that -- that -- well, I'm not going to say that; I'm going to
be nice about this. But, you know, it's a one-way street.
Kerr County is doing -- we're asking the taxpayers -- it's
not this Commissioners Court that -- out of the goodness of
our hearts. The taxpayers of this county are having to put
their hard-earned money down on the line for a state
function. M.H.M.R. needs to do this whole thing, or -- or
partnership with us; they provide the material and we do the
work.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, Commissioner, I would agree
with you --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see it any other
2-23-09
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
JUDGE TINLEY: I would agree with you that the
State needs to be responsible for providing mental health
treatment facilities for the citizens of this state, those
that are not there by virtue of a criminal court order, but
rather law-abiding citizens or taxpaying citizens who have
mental health issues. That should be the case, and I
wholeheartedly agree with it. The bottom line is, they have
abandoned that responsibility, and as in so many other
instances, they have dropped that responsibility -- or the
cost of that responsibility into the laps of the local
taxpayers. And I'm -- I'm fearful that not having this
crisis stabilization unit -- and this one is a pilot. I'm
not aware of any other in the state at this point in time
that are up and operating. This is a pilot program for
community-based M.H.M.R. mental health services. Without
this, I think the Sheriff is going to be running one big, bad
taxi service all over the state unless and until we get the
Legislature to change the law that says somebody else has got
to do it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not talking about the
stabilization unit. I agree with you 100 percent. I'm glad
it's there. I'm talking about spending taxpayers' money on a
road. I'm not talking about sending Rusty all over the
state. You know, we talk about the State creating unfunded
mandates. We talk about that almost every week that rolls
2-23-09
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
know, I'm not going to argue about it or debate it any more.
I'm simply going to vote no and go on with life, and love
y'all and go have lunch with you, if you're buying.
(Laughter.)
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: If I may comment, there's an
issue, and I brought it up at the last meeting, that I have.
My understanding, this stabilization unit is funded, period,
through the Legislature. You know, the issue is, what road
are they going to use, and how are they going to -- you know,
are they going to get stuck in there? So, the unit's going
to be there, period. The -- the big issue -- and we did get
an e-mail last week from Ms. Werlein, okay, who's head of
M.H.M.R., and I think Mr. Weden said in here -- my deal is,
neither my department nor the City of Kerrville, and we do it
jointly right now, can continue to afford to have to haul
patients all over the state of Texas, which is happening more
and more. And if you look at that code, say we haul them to
El Paso or Big Spring or wherever, and they're only kept 24
hours. Guess who has to pay for bringing them back? Kerr
County, not the City of Kerrville. The law actually says
Kerr County has to pay -- reimburse that state hospital up
there or whatever means it is to send them back down here,
2-23-09
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and I think it's kind of wrong when we have a unit right
here.
My issue was with all of this, and over dealing
with the road and the County paying money, was unless we
could get guaranteed in that 19-county catchment area that
our citizens here that need that service are going to go
here, we're not going to be hauling patients all over the
state any more. Mr. Weden kind of alluded to that, that yes,
that's exactly what would happen. I have an e-mail, and I
would want to hold Ms. Werlein to that e-mail, so that even
if they're full, we will take them to this unit and drop them
off, and they will transport them after that. If that can
occur, then with what we've spent, just law enforcement-wise,
and the -- you know, the manpower we're taking off the
street -- 'cause I have to call in somebody and pay them
overtime when one goes; I don't have that kind of manpower.
If that can happen, then I think the County's saving money by
spending a little bit to build this road and parking area.
If that can't happen, then I'm -- I'm like Buster; I don't
think we should do it without all the other 19 counties also
pitching into it. Because, to me, the whole thing is whether
or not we can -- we can haul our patients there and not have
to haul them anywhere else.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How are we getting them in
and out of there now?
2-~3-09
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We're hauling them.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I know. I'm talking about
into this stabilization unit.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's not open yet.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, it's not open?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Not open.
JUDGE TINLEY: April 1.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, it's inaccessible right
now.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Somewhere around April 1 or
something like that is when it's going to open.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the target date.
MS. HARGIS: What precludes us from billing the
other 19 counties in the catchment area their pro rata share
of this road? I don't --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Like we do everything else.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't know whether anything
precludes it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'd rather have the guarantee
that we're going to get our patients in there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think you could do both.
MS. HARGIS: Huh?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think you could do both.
Press for the guarantee, then send them all a prorated -- a
request for their prorated share.
2-23-09
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: Rex, couldn't we draft a pretty
simple interlocal agreement that -- for us to provide these
-- this funding, and for this work we get priority? Or --
you know, I mean, isn't that something that's fairly simple,
possibly, to draft? Anyway, but it may not be simple to get
them to sign it. And -- but that would -- I mean, that would
solve the problem, seems to me. I mean, then we will be
getting something as Kerr County.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We would be guaranteed of a
I service, and it would be kind of like an exchange, rather
than not getting a guarantee that we would get first chance.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's -- that's my issue. If
we're guaranteed service, that we can take them there and
save Kerr County all the -- the danger of hauling these -- we
all know what happened in San Antonio with the officer that
was transporting one that he had to shoot in the front seat
of the car, because they do have to be handled differently,
and the liability the county has to that when we're hauling
them all the way to Rusk or something. I think it -- it
would be very advantageous for the county to do it, if we can
get the guarantee that our patients from Kerr County are
going to that stabilization unit.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If we can get that for
$5,000, that would be money well spent.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Extremely well spent.
?-?3-09
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARGIS: But we can still bill the other
counties if y'all wish after that's done, if y'all want to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we get that, I wouldn't want
to bill them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let's pursue it.
It's not something you're going to have in time to either
approve or disapprove this court order, but it's something we
should pursue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, and Leonard's not going
to start doing any work over there for -- when did you say?
April? When were you going to start?
MR. ODOM: The estimated time of opening was April,
so I was waiting till we clarified this, and then start.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We could postpone this till
certainly the first meeting in March, see if we can get --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who pursues the commitment
for taking our patients? Would that be something Judge
Tinley does or something the County Attorney does? How do we
see that evolving?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Must be somebody in between
them over there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Sheriff at the end of a
gun or what?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: How it all starts? Well, it
precludes us from taking -- or how does it occur?
2-23-09
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, who's going to pick
up the initiative and run with it? That's really what I'm
asking.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: To get the guarantee?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't have any problem.
Judge Tinley sits on their board. I have no problem also
talking to Ms. Werlein and that, and seeing if we can get it
with Rex's help. I -- you know, we've got e-mails and we
have the -- I tried to pin it down in the last Commissioners
Court; you do have the transcript of that, from Mr. Weden.
But, you know, I -- that's my only issue. As long as we have
that guarantee. I don't want to be hauling these people
everywhere.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me see if we can make
this move along. I would move approval of the agenda item as
presented, and urge the County Judge, the Sheriff, and the
district -- and the County Attorney to pursue a commitment
from M.H.M.R. to take Kerr County patients when brought to
their doorstep.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: "Pursue" or "subject to"?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pursue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd be much happier with
"subject to."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I understand that.
2-23-09
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
16
17
I8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion. Do I hear a
second?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can you state that again?
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's get the reporter to read it
back.
(The reporter read back the motion as follows:)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: "Let me see
if we can make this move along. I would
move approval of the agenda item as
presented, and urge the County Judge, the
Sheriff, and the district -- and the
County Attorney to pursue a commitment
from M.H.M.R. to take Kerr County patients
when brought to their doorstep."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If anybody wants to clean
that up, be my guest.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, of course they're
going to receive the patients if there's a bed. I mean --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If there's a bed, there's
no issue.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But to receive them is the
key.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Because once they receive
2-23-09
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
them, they have to deal with them. That keeps the Sheriff
from having to transport them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The way I understand it.
I'li second your motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
Further question or discussion on the motion?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: To accept them? 'Cause it's
actually once they accept them, then they're theirs, and we
don't transport any more. They have to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not sure that that's
what that means at all.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My issue -- I can't go along
with it, because I think it's a -- it's the -- to pursue,
I
'i it's got to -- I mean, I have no problem with authorizing
Road and Bridge to do it right now, but to me, it's subject
to them having an agreement that they will receive them, not
that y'all are going to pursue.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I agree with the "pursue"
thing. I mean, it really needs to be more nailed down, that
they will guarantee that they will take them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you want to amend the
motion, amend it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll amend -- it's awful. Just
2-23-09
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
I2
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll withdraw my second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's see what the
amendment is coming up.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He withdrew it.
JUDGE TINLEY: But we have no second to the motion.
Do I hear a second to the motion?
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion dies for lack of a
second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll make a motion that we
authorize Road and Bridge to do the work as outlined in the
agenda item, subject to the Sheriff and the County Attorney
and the County Judge working out an agreement with M.H. --
M.H.M.R. Crisis Stabilization Unit that they will receive
Kerr County patients.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I will second that for sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
Further question or discussion on that motion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the -- the incentive is,
it's their responsibility whether they transport them to
another location or house them at this location.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I think if that's what
your -- if that's what you mean, you need to say that in the
2-23-09
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
55
motion. In other words, they're going to receive the person.
When you say your motion is that they receive the person,
they're going to receive the person.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll amend my motion to receive
them and house them.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Or transport them to the -- a
proper location.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question. Is
there a difference in this -- in the context of what we're
talking about between "receive" and "accept"? Somebody
answer that.
MR. EMERSON: All you have to do to clean your
motion up is change "receive" to "accept."
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll amend my motion to do
that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's acceptable to you?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That is acceptable.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right. We have a motion and a
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then I have another
question that will probably make it clear for me. Now, if
the City of Kerrville arrests somebody on the street and they
2-23-09
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
take them to your jail, and they take -- they pull in the
sallyport and they take the handcuffs off, whose person --
whose -- it's not a patient.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They're mine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The prisoner belongs, then,
to Kerr County. You've received it, and Kerr County picks up
the entire tab. If that person needs to be transferred
somewhere, we're responsible.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct, to a point.
There are some -- some different issues when it's a criminal
offense. I mean, if they get them and take them to the
hospital and have a magistrate go over there, read them their
rights and do the commitment, they're mine at the hospital.
Doesn't matter whether they're at the jail or not. We have
to provide for them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But my point is, they're no
longer City of Kerrville's prisoner.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. And what we're doing
here is exactly the same thing. Once -- once we deliver --
once you deliver a patient to M.H.M.R. and they --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Accept.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- accept that person, then
it's their patient. You're not responsible for taking it --
taking that person anywhere. You're not -- we're not
z-23-og
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
responsible for anything.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Technically -- go ahead.
MR. EMERSON: Technically, he could be. The way
the statute's written is that once they accept a patient,
there's four -- four provided modes of transportation, and
only if the first three fail does the Sheriff come back in
for transport.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: After they're committed.
MR. EMERSON: But the Sheriff is the last resort
transport once they've accepted the patient.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. What we've been doing
now is, we've been the first resort of transport, even before
they're accepted. Okay? And -- and what I'm saying is we
shouldn't -- you know, there could be -- and this is what
we're trying to get around. The language -- and I'm
definitely not going to be an attorney and practicing or
anything else in this, but it does say that it's got to be a
', -- an appropriate inpatient facility, okay? Now, if somebody
way up at Austin decides that this 16-bed stabilization unit,
even though we've got the guarantee from M.H.M.R. that
they're going to accept ours, but if somebody up in Austin
decides that this 16-bed stabilization unit is not the
nearest appropriate inpatient facility, I don't know where
that's going to leave us, other than transporting again,
'cause that's what's happened now. The commissioner of
2-23-09
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
M.H.M.R. or the State Health deal issued one the other day,
and that's what keeps us from going to the current 16 beds at
the State Hospital, because the commissioner issued one
saying if they're full, they are no longer the nearest
appropriate inpatient facility, and so now we're back to
transporting all over the state. If that were to happen with
this stabilization unit, I don't know where we're going to
be.
MR. EMERSON: The commissioner has the authority to
override whatever Ms. Werlein wants to do. If the
commissioner in Austin issues a decree that this facility is
-- is full and they're not going to accept anybody else, we
don't have any choice. She doesn't have any choice.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, but that's -- you know,
at least -- I mean, you can't predict that. You don't know
when that's going to occur, and it will occur at some point.
But --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- every time you take a
patient --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sixteen beds in 16 counties.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Nineteen counties, 16 beds.
Normally they go on what they call diversion right now at
least two or three times a week.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's better than having no
2-23-09
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
beds in 19 counties.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: My deal is if they can
transport them, 'cause the stabilization unit -- Judge,
correct me if I'm wrong -- it's for short-term, you know,
commitments. If they end up being -- turning into long-term
after their hearing, they're transported somewhere else.
They have to be, and M.H.M.R. or the State Hospital has to do
that transport. Unless they're just not -- it's only for
short-term commitments, is what these are, so they're moving
through those beds pretty rapidly. And I think that they can
pretty well guarantee us that we're going to get first call
on those beds, and they can move the other one out to a
different location.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'm glad y'all all
feel better about that. I'm going to vote no because of the
taxpayer issue.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussion on
I the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(Commissioners Williams, Letz, and Oehler voted in
~I favor of the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I oppose.
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Okay. Let's
go to Item 12 -- excuse me, Item 11. Consider, discuss, and
2-23-09
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
I4
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
~ __
~I, 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 501(c) section of the I.R.S. Code. This was a
carry-over from the last meeting and some issues that came up
~I with -- I believe we had a 501(c)(3), which is pretty much a
no-brainer; then we had a (c)(7), I think, that came up, and
the question was, what about those in between?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How many are there? One
through 10 or something? Or --
JUDGE TINLEY: You'll have to ask somebody that
knows more about the I.R.S. Code than I do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: At least I through 7.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who would that be?
MS. HARGIS: There's more --
MR. EMERSON: Not me.
JUDGE TINLEY: County Attorney has disclaimed.
MS. HARGIS: There's more than eight. I think
there -- I don't know if there's more than eight at this
point; I haven't looked at the current one, but there's at
least eight.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds to me like we're not ready to
proceed with this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, my view is that I don't
have a problem with expanding it, but I just think we need to
2-23-09
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have criteria, and they need to be able to prove to us --
that means we're going to have to make some judgment calls as
to who's bona fide for free use or not.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is I through 8 -- are they
nonprofit -- all of those people nonprofit?
', COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I was just going to ask a
similar question. Can we get identified for us what 1
through 8 is?
MS. HARGIS: Yes. Let me print the code for you,
and I'll get it for you for next time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And are we using part of the
criteria here, or then those -- those businesses then
contribute something to the community? Is that part of our
deal, too?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we'd have a better
opportunity to figure that out if we knew what the -- exactly
what 1 through 8 was.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the criteria we kind of
have now, is that they have to be -- I don't know.
"Contributes" is not in there, but there has to be --
JUDGE TINLEY: Benefit.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- benefit to the community,
and they have to be at least a local branch. Or if it's a
national branch, a local branch has to be here that's
-23-09
62
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I word?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Benefit.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Benefit. So, those two
things would be okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: The current policy, Commissioner, I
believe, says 501 (c) (3) and 501 (c) (7) .
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Six.
JUDGE TINLEY: Six, are the ones that are eligible,
which does not give us the discretion to --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can't we just add to it, if
they don't fall in these two categories --
JUDGE TINLEY: And I think the issue is whether or
not those that are listed under 501(c), one through however
many there are, --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that we have the ability to grant
authorization for each individual organization, irrespective
of whether they're 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8, to be added to
the list to receive that discount. And I think that's really
the issue. But I think, like Commissioner Williams says,
what we really need to do -- what are the criteria for 1
through 8, or however many there are?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There may be one other
2-23-09
63
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
I2
13
14
15
16
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
little caveat here. I'm kind of asking the Auditor this. In
addition to the -- the federal code, 501 (c) code, that goes 1
through 8, there's also a state -- the ability for an
organization to get a state not-for-profit status; is that
MS. HARGIS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And as such, they may not
necessarily qualify for any of the I through 8.
MS. HARGIS: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we'd like to know about
that.
MS. HARGIS: They have to apply to I.R.S. for that,
and it does not guarantee -- there's, like, a two- to
three-year waiting period on most of them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who's going to provide this
list?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The County Auditor's going
to do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, let's move on, if we
might, then, and go to Item 12; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action authorizing application for 2009-2010
Community Development Block Grant/Colonias funding for
O.S.S.F. replacement of failing systems for low-income
homeowners living in designated areas of the county where
public sewer is not available. Commissioner Williams?
2-23-09
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
64
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. I placed
this on the agenda because I had two very interesting phone
calls this past week. One of them Commissioner Oehler knows
about, probably, because it was a phone call from the
I
Director of Public Works at the City, talking to some of the
things that he and I have had near and dear to our hearts and
trying to achieve. The bottom line is that that phone call
advised me -- and I think, if I'm not mistaken, Bruce, you
had a similar phone call before I did?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Probably identical to yours.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. In which the City
says, you know, those are all great ideas, guys, but we don't
have the capacity through our lift stations to do what you
', want to do. Not capacity in the treatment center -- in the
treatment facility; they have great capacity there. They're
saying to us that in the case of coming in from the west,
where Commissioner Oehler was talking about using the line
that's going to be abandoned that was put in by the Ingram
school system originally, the stubs at Guadalupe R.V. Park,
~~ and the initiative that we were going to do to pick up where
the City did not finish Blue Ridge/Ocaso, and maybe take on
', the industrial park as well, he's saying that there are 2
I~' lift stations that service that park, and that those lift
stations are maxed, and therefore it can't take any more flow
~'~ through the pipes to move it through to the treatment
2-23-09
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
facility.
Secondly, in that same context, he says with regard
to what we were proposing to do from -- for our Kerrville
~ South and the Phase 5, right? We only have funding for Phase
4, and that's okay. For Phase 5, in which we would clean --
~, finish cleaning up some areas down there and possibly hook up
that 52-unit apartment complex that's all on septics on
Ranchero Road, he's saying the same thing applies there. We
', don't have enough capacity to get that excess -- the extra
~', flow through what we always thought was the Rolling Green
lift station, but he calls it now the Birkdale lift station,
on to the Legion lift station, which takes it to its final
hop over to the treatment facility.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: One of them is the -- it's
the one here on Jefferson.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, Jefferson Street
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Jefferson line is sub-sized
beyond that point to carry more flow, and the lift station is
-- is old. And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Jefferson and one a little
further on the --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Knapp Road.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Knapp Road, okay. The
second phone call --
2-z3-og
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I4
15
I6
I7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The second phone call was
initiated in -- Jody, did all that other material -- did we
make copies of that so I can give it to the Court? We
didn't, did we? Okay. You'll just have to take my word for
it, that there is a program available which they have put
into place in several counties around us, hill country-type
counties, the counties to the south of us, where you can get
some C.D.B.G. or colonial funding to replace septics for
people who are low to moderate income, who do not have the --
have the wherewithal to replace a failing or
out-of-compliance septic system. And I said, well, in areas
where public sewer doesn't exist? He said yeah. Are we
talking about areas where we're planning public sewer? He
said, well, those would be excluded. So, if we had areas in
the county where people who have low to moderate income, and
they have a problem and they can't afford to replace or
repair their system, these funds could be made available for
that purpose, and that's the purpose of this agenda item.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- are those areas
considered colonial?
2-23-09
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 WILLIAMS: We've already identified
some that were colonias, and, yes, it would include those
that have already been pre --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the issue with the
lift station? Pump's not big enough? Pipe's not big enough?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I guess, for certain,
it's the pump. Now, there may be some pipe issues as well,
but I think that the more relevant question is, when are you
going to fix it? And the answer is, well, that could be five
to 15 years out before we fix it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. Can we build a road and
a parking lot? Would that help?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Over or near?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It doesn't matter, just out
somewhere.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I had a discussion with Guy
Overby about this issue. That's somewhat related to this.
That's why we got the phone calls. But, you know, he -- I
think he's prepared to go -- go to the -- go to the City and
say, look, you know, you don't have five or ten years to fix
this infrastructure problem. You have some obligations that
you've already contracted for in the city of Ingram, and
there's other areas that need to be tied on, and some of them
I believe have already been mentioned that don't have city
sewer in some instances, and so this will be a -- this will
2-23-09
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
be one way to at least have some funding for some people that
flat can't afford to fix the problem. I don't --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's the whole
purpose of it. I did ask him, however, Commissioner, did --
do your calculations in terms of flow through these lift
stations include the anticipated flow from the city of Ingram
on its sewer system? And he said it did. So --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Maybe.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But what -- but this agenda
item doesn't -- is only for areas where there is not, or not
planned to be, public sewer?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This doesn't count all the lift
stations. This is just other. Who does the work?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's contracted out. Once
you've identified and you've vetted the candidates, okay,
through our Environmental Health Department, probably, and
so-and-so is eligible, right, they would contract with an
installer who would do a licensed system, and then that's
funded directly through the grant. It's administered by
Grantworks. It's not coming through us in terms of the
funding.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess -- I have a pretty big
concern about us signing off on dollars going with a local
installer installing properly for individuals. We're talking
2-23-09
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
about -- that's	a pretty -	- I mean, we	have	some very	good
installers, and	there are	some not-so-	good	installers	around
the county.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me see if I can go to
the heart of your question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I have a concern that
that's being done. I can see this being viewed as a cash cow
for some people that aren't real reputable.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, I think that's a
valid concern. But our Environmental Health Department would
be involved in identifying and permitting and inspecting, and
our match or quid pro quo would be to waive those inspection
fees, okay? I meant to mention that and I just got around to
it. So, our Environmental Health people -- if we don't sign
off and it's not licensed and it's not inspected and so
forth, that installer's not going to get paid.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you're -- we're talking
about someor_e out in the -- somewhere that has a failed
septic tank, an old failed septic tank, and this government
money helps them replace that septic tank with a system
that's approved by the state and Kerr County, upgraded and --
and all that. I've got 900 other questions that I won't ask
at this time, but if we go down this road, I've got some
really serious questions. As an example, are we going to
promote spraying? The aerobic systems? Are we promoting
2-23-09
~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
that? Or are we going to suggest -- how does all that work,
if :err County's involved in that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- selection? That's for
later on, though, Bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not today.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I don't think we're
going to prcmote anything, but that's a good question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But I think -- but, I mean, I
think it's an excellent question, because what happens is --
', which Ray isn't here, but I think Bruce may know, but my
understanding is that we just put the -- it's up to the
installer to install what they want to install. We can't
tell them what to install. And if they choose to do this,
which is a -- a monthly maintenance fee then coming in to
them, then we're getting -- we're helping these private
businesses put -- get the money.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How would that -- how would
this differ from what we currently do? If a person lives in
a rocky area and doesn't have the soil to support a --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Conventional.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- a drainfield, doesn't --
doesn't our Environmental Health people -- aren't they aware
of that? And in terms of what the recommendation is that
2-~3-09
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
they would accept for engineering for proper systems?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think they do, and it all
has to be engineered, anyway.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: According to the soil,
right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Has to be -- there has to --
designers have to provide a design based on soil.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But designers tend to promote
-- historically, designers --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I understand.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- have promoted systems that
are aerobic so they can get a monthly maintenance fee, when
there are other systems out there that are never even
presented to the public.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the point.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I have encouraged
Environmental Health to pursue more of the conventional and
the -- the non-mechanical systems wherever possible, give
that as an alternative, even if they have to spend more to do
that. It would be up to the owner to make that decision.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But you can -- and if you're
willing to spend enough money to haul in soil, you can put in
a conventional system or -- or a bona fide conventional
25 ~ system --
2-~3-09
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Anywhere.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- where you don't have any
pumps and aerators and chlorine and all that stuff.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Don't remind me.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me see if I can shorten
the discussion a little bit by saying this is only to
authorize the application. If there are certain things about
the program that we don't like, once we get past the
application stage, we can back away from it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll go along, but I'm less --
I'm less enthusiastic about this than anything else you've
ever brought to us. (Laughter.) The whole category -- in
this whole area.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We've spent more time on
septic tanks today than we have on the mental health of our
community.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The literal translation of
what Commissioner Letz said was I'm losing stature here.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You better make a motion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move we authorize the
application as -- as defined in the agenda item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll second it, for right now.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second -- an
unenthusiastic second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
2-23-09
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion on
the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your_ right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: A11 opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go
ahead and do Item 13; consider, discuss, take appropriate
action on census PSAP data and maps as prepared by AACOG for
Kerr County. Commissioner Williams? PSAP, of course, does
not mean the traditional Public Safety Answering Point, as in
911 terminology.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir. There's another
terminology for that, Judge, if I can get this up on the
front of my computer screen here. The Court remembers that
we did contract with AACOG to do this census PSAP data
mapping for Kerr County, and in which what we're trying to do
is establish census blocks. And PSAP is called -- let's see,
what's it called? Census -- however it is; I can't remember
what it is. Census blocks and groups within the county. And
they brought -- AACOG brought down the preliminary maps,
which Judge Tinley and I reviewed with -- with Mr. Kruse, who
did this work, and they are a part of your backup. Now --
Jody, we don't have the big ones, do we?
MS. GRINSTEAD: The big what? I'm sorry.
2-23-09
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Big maps, from the -- that
came with Mr. Kruse's visit the other day. We didn't get
those from the Appraisal District? Because what we have
here, all it does is identify the blocks. Doesn't
necessarily identify the tracts. The census tract and block,
which you can see by looking at the map, that's on the third
page of your backup, the agenda item, how the numbers have
been arranged so that they do comply. The large block on the
top, Kerr County, 2,405 in that block group in the western
part of the county, and 804 and 1,856.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Bill, is -- what is 2,405?
That's the number of --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: People?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- people?
JUDGE TINLEY: Estimated.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Estimated in that area.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That live in that area?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Registered voters, over 18?
JUDGE TINLEY: Bodies.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: People? Humans beings?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Human beings. Bodies, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Children included?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
2-~3-09
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
75
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my understanding.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There we go. Thank you,
Jody. You're going to have to help me out here, Judge. You
were in this discussion, too.
JUDGE TINLEY: They've got some guidelines about,
you know, how many should be in a tract and how many should
be in a block, and and as the -- the larger ones grow, then
you've got to reallocate or chop them up into smaller pieces.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can I ask you a question?
How are those blocks established, these that we're looking at
here?
JUDGE TINLEY: Preliminarily, they were established
by the census people at AACOG.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: And all these little dots that are
on this map that you see are what they have identified as new
believed to be dwelling structures since the last census, and
they have established estimates of the populations within
those groups. And as a result of some of the growth,
Commissioner Williams and I worked with the gentleman from
AACOG that's in charge of this for Kerr County, to cut the
pie again, as it were, in a couple of different instances.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me see if I can help
you with the numbers. There are two categories here. You
2-23-09
76
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
have census tracts and block groups. Block groups are a
minimum of 600 persons, with a maximum of 3,000. These are
numbers set by the Census Bureau. Census tracts, the larger,
are a minimum of 1,200 persons and maximum of 8,000 people.
So, what you have to do in these cases is make certain that
you're within those parameters of census tracts and block
group splits.
JUDGE TINLEY: We cut one, see, because it's
approaching 6,000 here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question for somebody.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How do they come up with this
data, and how recent is it?
JUDGE TINLEY: They got it off of the Appraisal
District, primarily.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: And it's fairly current, according
to the information they provided to us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's also fairly inaccurate in
rural areas.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that well could be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why? Because I have more
growth than you do? Is that your complaint? I've never in
my life seen anything like this.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What I'm looking at, I'm just
z-z~-o9
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
looking at Lane Valley Road that I obviously drive a lot.
There are at least three new residences that aren't shown on
that road, and I don't know if it's coming from the appraisal
reports. That might be part of the problem, that Kendall
County has been the primary appraiser for the eastern part of
the county, though that changed this year.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This came from Appraisal
District to AACOG.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. But it's -- I mean,
it's -- and there's -- they have a whole subdivision missing,
The Reserve, which has ten homes in it. That's just Falling
Water there, and Falling Water has more than that now. I
just see -- you know, I don't think we need to be relying
much on this, at least in the eastern part of the county,
because there's a lot of residences that I know that aren't
on here.
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the recutting of the pie, as
it were, that Commissioner Williams and I participated in,
one of them was out in the Ingram and northwest of Ingram
area. The other was in the Kerrville South area, where it
was recommended that -- that we add new division lines
because of the -- the maximum number being approached for a
block.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm looking at this. This just
doesn't make sense. Right here in my precinct also, Sidney
2-~3-09
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
Baker, right next to Walmart, they have probably 50 homes
being built right up there off Earl Garrett, between Walmart
and the courthouse -- or the old Walmart and the courthouse,
and no homes have been built up there in the last ten years.
Not even one home built.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Between Walmart and the
courthouse?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The old Walmart.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Up here.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Tractor Supply.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Between Tractor Supply and the
courthouse.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, okay, the old Walmart.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right in there. Now, there's
-- now, over there by Schreiner, there's a few others there
in that little subdivision that's north of Schreiner, but not
that number. And you go out -- the same thing out there in
the Coronado area. I mean, there's some new homes that have
been built, new developments, I guess, that Andy Phillips is
working on, but not like they're showing there. That area's
pretty established. I just -- before we start making
decisions, I'd like to see this data looked at a little
I
closer.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we can certainly tell
them that.
2-23-09
79
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Unless I'm looking at the map
wrong, that's how I would see some of those areas.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, of course, the flat -- final
~, numbers are going to be determined from the actual census
activity --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- itself. This is preliminary
information from the Appraisal District, solely for the
purpose of trying to establish tracts and blocks within those
tracts, so that -- or within the guidelines for the purpose
of taking the census itself.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: These tract and block
numbers have to -- are intended to total up to what the Texas
State Data Center says is our population, or estimated
population right now, okay? He had originally -- his
original estimate was that our population was at 51,000
people. We said we didn't think we were that high. We
doublechecked with the State Demographer's office one more
time, and the data center says that right now, we are -- as
of July 1st, 2007, which may put some perspective to the
Commissioner, that as of July 1, 2007, Kerr County's
estimated population was 47,504. Okay? So, we've got two
years since that for whatever growth we've had, and we still
have the remainder of this year before we get into the actual
census again. So, it's your call if you think the numbers
2-23-09
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
are not correct, but the block -- the block numbers and the
tract numbers are geared to come into 47,504.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just looking at this, between
Harper Road and Sidney Baker, and from Main Street to the
north, which is this area right here, there must be 100 homes
right there, and I'd be surprised if there's five.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Brand new.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Brand-new homes. I mean, it's
just not right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a question.
Bill, what is -- are we -- are we expecting AACOG to go --
take further steps and them eventually do the census for Kerr
County?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, no, no, no.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or are we -- is this -- are
we preparing to go and hire a law firm and then -- and
provide this as part of that information for them?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that -- that's what we're
doing?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes. This is kind of base
information.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, we can't hire a law
firm and provide them with inaccurate information.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All we can do is say this
2-~3-09
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is what we've got.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I'd like to go back to
the Appraisal District and have them relook at these areas;
draw some circles and say, "Tell us the addresses of the new
homes right here."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, we can certainly --
tell you what I'll be happy to do, is see if we can get David
Dunn here and arrange for each Commissioner to come in and
take a look at it at that time with him, and spend the
necessary time and get his return.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Be glad to.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 'Cause if anybody knows where
the growth is, I think it's us.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right, exactly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that worthy of a
workshop, or -- you know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, yeah, maybe a
workshop.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: May be more efficient from his
standpoint.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That may be a better use of
his time; I don't know.
2-23-09
82
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
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay, a workshop.
JUDGE TINLEY: Could go to your house in the
evening to eat fried chicken.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We could. Your house.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right, sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll get back to him, see
if we can set up either a workshop or individual time blocks
when Commissioners can come talk to him.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Why don't we take about a
15-minute recess, folks.
(Recess taken from 10:40 a.m. to 10:55 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if
we might. Let's go to Item 14; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to set the fee paid to jurors as
reimbursement. Senate Bill 560 from the 80th regular session
has once again rewritten the Government Code 61.001 that
defines reimbursement for jury service. In compliance with
Senate Bill 560, a new order needs to be entered to set the
fee paid to jurors as reimbursement effective April 1, 2009.
Ms. Uecker? Why do they call it reimbursement, as opposed to
juror pay?
MS. UECKER: I don't know, but they do. I didn't
write it; I just read it.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going to blame it on you; you're
2-23-09
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the one that keeps bringing it back here.
MS. UECKER: What I'm asking is, if you look on the
second page of the agenda request, it's $10 per day for the
i
first day the person is in attendance in court and in
response to a jury summons. $30 --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Before they have been
selected to serve?
MS. UECKER: Oh, yeah, absolutely. And I'll
explain all that in a minute. $30 for the first day a jury
-- a juror reports and is actually selected and sworn to a
jury panel, whether or not testimony is heard. And then $40
for the second day and each additional day of service,
whether or not the prospective juror is selected as a panel.
Now, the $10, the reason I'm asking for that is, everybody
knows by now how long I've been here, and that's 40 years.
Forty years ago, the reimbursement or the pay for a juror to
report was $6. It's still $6, so that's why I'm asking for
that to go to 10. Now, on the $30, that'll take a little bit
more explaining, because -- and this is really beneficial
more even in County Court at Law and in your court, and even
in J.P. courts, and we've had some cases just recently where
this has been a problem, too. If we call a juror -- a jury
panel in on Monday, they're selected, they start testimony,
and we've had a couple of them that have worked until
11 o'clock at night, reached a verdict. We paid them $6.
z-z~-oa
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
!, So, what the $30 does is it gives those folks that sit there
all day long on the first day of jury selection and testimony
I
at least $30 for their service. Now, $40, that's -- you
know, I can't -- we can't do anything about that. That's
what the statute says you have to reimburse a juror, $40.
Even if -- let's say we have a case that it takes several
days to even select. Even the second day of voir dire, that
whole panel gets $40. So, that's why we try to stay as long
as we can to go ahead and get a jury selected on the first
day. First of all, our current order doesn't comply with the
new 61.001. And I kind of tried to figure it out. Paying
the jurors $6 -- $10 instead of $6 to report is -- will be
about -- car. be as much as a $5,000 a year impact on the
budget. Of course, the good news is, I anticipate that after
we get the jury docket, especially in criminal cases, down a
little bit -- as y'all know, the jail population is
decreasing. We've got a new D.A. that's working real hard.
We got a new District Judge that's working real hard to get
these cases done. We've had a lot of jury trials. And what
I anticipate is that with -- and Amos is here; I'm glad he
is, our new D.A., that he's got this track file docket that
we're going to start pretty soon, that I suspect will greatly
reduce the number of jurors that we're calling. The other
good news is, I'm going to try to call less jurors, because
we've been having to call 350 just to get, you know, enough
z-z3-o9
85
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
to come in so that we can select jurors. My new judge has
said -- which hasn't been done before; I've been trying to
get this done, is my new judge has said, "I want them to go
through the contempt process." Because when we call in a
panel, the jurors don't show up. The word is out there on
the street, "Don't go. They're not going to do anything
anyway." The one time that I remember that we actually did
it, and we did a press release on contempt to jurors, we
pulled jurors in here, and I think we only actually fined two
of them, but for about a year after that, we had more jurors
than we knew what to do with. So, the word gets out there.
So, Judge Williams now has said, "Yeah, we need to do the
contempt process." So, I think with all of this said and
done, I think it's going to be -- impact is not going to be
as bad as maybe we think it's going to be. And, you know,
people take off of work, and for $6, if they stay here all
day, I mean, that -- and I've approved -- I mean, both
District Judges think it's a good idea, and I just talked to
Amos about it. He thinks it's a good idea.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have a comment?
MR. EMERSON: I do. And I don't want to put a fly
in Linda's ointment, but since Judge Williams and Bruce Curry
have kicked a bunch of cases to us to try state jail
felonies, and it looks like, from talking to the attorneys,
most of them are -- are bent on going to trial, that's going
2-23-09
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
may not be more than it is now, but --
MS. UECKER: Yes, usually it will, but that's also
where the $30 is going to help you, because you're probably
going to be -- considering the type of cases they are,
they're going to last a little bit longer than your normal
misdemeanor, so they may be here till 11:00 or 10 o'clock at
night, and I think $30 is fair for that full day's service.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does this funding come from a
designated fund, or does it come out of the general fund?
MS. UECKER: Well, it goes -- it comes out of
general fund, but we collect a -- a jury fee on criminal and
on civil. A party pays a $30 jury fee. Of course, that
doesn't cover it at all, but we do collect, I think, a jury
fee on criminal.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But those fees go into the
general fund where you --
MS. UECKER: General fund. Now, on the $40, for
every $40 we pay, the State reimburses us $34 of that $40, so
that 40 only costs us actually 6.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Back to the $6. Why don't
you have -- instead of the 30, why don't you have a 40 there
as well?
MS. UECKER: That's up to you.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I understand that, but
2-~3-09
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
87
MS. DECKER: You want me to tell you why I made it
30?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MS. DECKER: Because every month, we do --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're from Johnson City,
number one.
MS. DECKER: I'm the -- Sheriff Milton Jung used to
call me the Johnson City Flash. The reason I did that is to
make it easier to --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. DECKER: -- make the reports to the state,
II
because otherwise, it's going to take us a while to determine
which of those 40's -- if they were both 40, we can collect
reimbursements from the State on the 40's that were paid for
the second day, but not the 40's for this.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How long will it be before
some wizened juror decides that the literal interpretation of
"A" would be the combination of (1) and (2), and get 40
anyhow?
MS. DECKER: Well, the order says -- if you'll look
at that second page, it says Number A(1), and then at the end
of (1), it says "or."
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
2-23-09
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. DECKER: (2), $30. So, on the first day you're
either going to get paid 10 or you're going to get paid 30,
not both.
JUDGE TINLEY: Question.
MS. DECKER: Yes, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: Say a panel's brought in, and this
is fairly common in Judge Brown's court, and he's apt to
select two or three juries in one day and then give them
report-back days, which are not necessarily consecutive. And
they may not be sworn. They're selected, but they're not
sworn. They don't qualify, then, for the $30?
MS. DECKER: That's right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Or would they?
MS. DECKER: That's right, because the order would
read $30 if they're --
JUDGE TINLEY: Selected and sworn.
MS. DECKER: -- selected and sworn. So, if he does
that, then when he brings them in the second day, they're
going to get 40 anyway, see, 'cause that's already their
second day. That automatically --
JUDGE TINLEY: That doesn't have to be consecutive?
MS. DECKER: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question, I guess, goes to
the $30. I hear a lot of instances where it's kind of -- may
2-23-09
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not be sworn, but they're almost -- I mean, they've been here
the better part of the day; they come -- go to lunch, come
back, and then at the last minute, plea bargain's accepted
and they're -- they go home. To me, those people ought to
get more money than someone who just shows up and gets
dismissed right away. I mean, they spent --
MS. DECKER: I don't know how you would do that.
That would be a bookkeeping nightmare. And that's why I'm
asking for 10, just for that reason. That -- you know, that
I think they are -- I mean, they can't even drive to the
courthouse for $6 any more, much less drive and have lunch.
They can't on 10 either, but -- and if y'all want to go
higher, if you want to make that 15, that's fine with me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, that's okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm fine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's kidding.
MS. DECKER: He's kidding?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll -- do we need to approve
this? Accept it?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's talk about funding, or
impact on the present budget right quick. What is it doing
to us right now?
MS. DECKER: Well, in doing some calculating, it
probably is going to impact us a little bit this year. I
2-~3-09
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
think -- you know, funds have been set aside to pay the
jurors, and I think we're fine with that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Really?
MS. UECKER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We increase from 6 to 10,
and then the 40's a new number?
MS. UECKER: No, we've been doing 40. We've
already budgeted for the 40.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, that's budgeted, and the
30 is budgeted?
MS. UECKER: Plus we get -- and in district court,
we -- because of the number of jury trials that we've been
having, and hopefully that'll reduce, I mean, we've been
getting as much as $3,000 to $5,000 a month back from the
State. That goes back into that jury fund.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That goes back into that
fund?
MS. UECKER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, there's no budget impact
dollar-wise this year? I mean, no impact --
MS. UECKER: There will be some, yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But you have enough money in
the budget to cover it?
MS. UECKER: I think -- yeah, I think we're okay.
2-23-09
91
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
When I looked at that, the only impact is going to be the
10 -- the $10, increasing from $6 to $10.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I`ll make a motion that we
accept the recommendation of District Clerk for juror
reimbursement as presented, and cancel all previous orders
relating to same.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. I would
note that we have an 11 o'clock timed item, Item 16, update
on Tyler Technologies issues. That was requested by the Tax
Assessor. The Tax Assessor is ill today and asked that that
item be passed. We'll go to Item 15; consider, discuss, and
take appropriate action on request to approve the Texas
Eler_tronic Framework Standard Service Level Agreement, and
authorize County Judge to sign the agreement. What does this
really involve?
MS. UECKER: Well, this is actually -- this is the
local rules for district and county courts for electronic
filing that has to be approved by the Supreme Court. All of
2-23-09
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
our judges had to sign it, including Judge Tinley, and I have
already submitted that to the Supreme Court for approval.
Now, this agreement that you're looking at is the agreement
between Bearing Point, which is the State's service provider
for e-filing, and the county. This is the standard agreement
for services, fees -- let's see, the approval. You know, how
-- how we're going to get paid, what we're going to get paid.
And right now, what they're proposing is -- of course,
Bearing Point gets $4 for every document that they, you know,
run through their system, and then we'll get $2 for every
document. The bottom line is, is we're not going to have
that much e-filing, especially not from locals, not for a
while. Where it's really going to come in handy, and it's
going to take, you know, a year or so to really get it going,
is so that the Houston lawyers, the San Antonio lawyers, the
Dallas lawyers, the out-of-state lawyers know that they can
e-file to us and they don't have to overnight it, drive it or
I whatever.
Now, the reason I'm doing this now is because my
ultimate goal -- and I've met with Keith Hottle, who is the
clerk of the Fourth Court of Appeals. To be able to submit
our transcripts on appeal by e-filing, you know, we're
talking boxes and boxes and boxes of documents, a transcript,
and the copy of it that has to go to be able to do that. And
when I talked to Keith last week, and it's just going to be
2-23-09
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
for civil cases for a while, until the Supreme Court okays
it. The project is called TAMES, T-A-M-E-S; it's the Texas
Electronic Management for Appellate System, something like
that. But they want to use Kerr County, and I have agreed to
do that as kind of a test project for small counties.
They're doing a large and a -- and Keith -- Keith is talking
with the Supreme Court right now, and they like the idea of
using our county, because for our county, we are, you know,
more up to speed electronically than most counties our size,
so we'll probably be the test site for that. But to get
there, we have to do this first, and it's not going to cost
us anything to do this. We've got a couple of meetings set
up with John and the folks from the Fourth Court of Appeals,
and the -- and the TAMES folks, in addition to the -- the
electronic fingerprint thing, too. Anyway, that's where I
want to go ultimately. This would also allow the court
reporter to submit their statement of facts and briefs on any
cases to the -- to the Fourth Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: What impact does this have on our
I.T, -- existing I.T. system?
MS. DECKER: Once we get it set up, there shouldn't
be any, I don't think.
MR. TROLINGER: Well, there's the integration
piece, but that's it, between the contractor and the software
vendor.
2-23-09
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. DECKER: Yeah. Yeah, that's between Bearing
Point and the Software Group. They've been trying to get me
to do e-filing, and I have said all along, until -- you know,
before, the e-filing system was I e-mail it to you, you print
it out, you punch holes in it, you file it -- you put it in
the file. Well, that's not any different than what -- you
either bring it in -- I mean, that's more work for us. We'd
become a print shop. And I -- and I told them, I said, until
that document comes in, populates my data fields, and its
image goes directly to the case -- the software system, then,
you know, we're not doing it. Kerr County's not
participatir_g, because I'm not going to ask for more staff
just to make e-filing easy for you. So, we're at that point
now where, since we've gone to Odyssey, we're going to be
able to do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is this -- is this just you,
or are there -- are there other clerks, other people --
MS. DECKER: This goes for -- Jannett can do the
same thing; J.P.'s can do the same thing. It's all civil
right now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Can they use --
MS. DECKER: That's for the whole county.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is for the county?
MS. DECKER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rex, have you seen this?
2-23-09
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
MR. EMERSON: I have not.
MS. DECKER: I was going to give him a copy.
MR. EMERSON: Interestingly enough, John was just
telling me, I guess Bearing Point's filed for bankruptcy.
MS. DECKER: Yeah, they have.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. Well, hell, let's
approve the thing and get going, then.
MS. DECKER: They have, but this bankruptcy is for
re --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Reorganization? Chapter
11?
MS. DECKER: -- reorganization, and they're -- it's
not going to impact any of the e-filing stuff.
JUDGE TINLEY: Since Phil Mickelson won the
Northern Trust Open, they're probably going to get propped
back up again.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's an interesting
observation.
MS. DECKER: So, yeah. I already --
JUDGE TINLEY: That's one of his sponsors.
MS. DECKER: I already made several calls on the
Chapter 11, and I've been assured that it's not going to
impact us. As a matter of fact, I talked to Keith Hottle
again last Friday and asked him if he had any concerns about
it, and he said no, he didn't. He'd been talking with some
2-23-09
96
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of the big dogs down there with Bearing Point, and he also
had been assured that it would not impact what we're doing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Linda, I've just been glancing
through this kind of while you were talking. Does this say
anywhere in the document what's covered by e-mail?
MS. DECKER: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does it say anywhere in here
what is covered by e-mail? I mean, what -- I see a whole
bunch of stuff about what governments shall do and not do,
but does it ever say what e-file is in this document? I
mean, I don't see where it says, like, you know, you can
file --
MS. DECKER: I think -- I think --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- this, this, and --
MS. DECKER: Well, e-filing is any document in a
civil. The local rules don't have to be approved by the
Commissioners Court. Right now, we're still getting them --
you know, they're off with -- at the Supreme Court, getting
them approved. This is the main document. This is just the
working contract for us to work with Bearing Point and Texas
Online. Texas Online is the system that the sate -- the
Legislature has chosen, I think, powered by Bearing Point.
MR. TROLINGER: Portal.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, what this does, this --
this document is just kind of a master document to let Kerr
2-23-09
97
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
County work with the other parties that are listed in here?
MS. UECKER: Right, mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- but what it does is that
e-file will mean that any civil documents that used to be
served -- you know, handled by paper is now handled
electronically.
MS. UECKER: Can be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can be.
MS. UECKER: Yes, can be. And what would -- what
we're going to do is, we're going to do some education stuff
with the Bar Association, and on our web site, we'll, you
know, put a link probably to the -- how to e-file. It
doesn't matter whether it's a one-page document, whether it's
-- whatever it is; it's going to cost an attorney $6. If he
does two at the same time, it's $12. And that's why I say
it's -- I don't anticipate a large volume. I mean, Dallas
County is just now getting to where they're starting to get
~' some volume. It -- it just takes a while for attorneys to
accept the fact that they have to pay $6, and it's
~~ actually -- it's a revenue for us once we do get it going,
', because we get $2 of that $6.
I
', COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Two dollars of the six, or two
dollars in addition to the six?
MS. UECKER: Of the six.
2-23-09
98
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
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
MS. DECKER: Texas Online or Bearing Point gets
four, we get two.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Now, what happens -- and I set
off -- there's a couple of things in here I didn't notice
about who's responsible if something doesn't happen. What
happens if there's a hiccup along the way electronically and
something doesn't get in there?
JUDGE TINLEY: John's fault.
MS. DECKER: John's fault.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is there a "hiccup" clause?
MS. DECKER: No. That's Bearing Point.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're responsible for all
MS. DECKER: It either -- could be Bearing Point;
the County?
MS. DECKER: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. As long as Rex has no
problem with it, I don't have a problem with it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
MS. DECKER: That's the same contract as all the
other counties that are using e-filing. We didn't change it
up any. So --
2-23-09
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
MR. EMERSON: I'll be happy to review it, but --
MS. UECKER: Okay, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll move approval of the
agenda item subject to County Attorney approval.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
MS. UECKER: The -- the copy that I gave Cheryl for
recording in the minutes does -- I did attach a copy of the
local rules. That has gone to the Supreme Court for filing
~ purposes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 17; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to approve using 2008
capital loan software training fund for Tax
Assessor/Collector's office for the disbursement system.
Training would be to institute the use of the disbursement
modular on which there has been no prior past training, and
be considered new training, as it would comply with software
training funds that we have put into the 2008 capital loan.
2-23-09
100
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
The requested amount is $5,000. Ms. Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: I'm going to let Mr. Trolinger speak
to this. I did put the item on for -- for Diane, but I don't
know as much about it as John does, so I'm going to defer to
him.
MR. TROLINGER: I have some details. Software
Group, Tyler Technologies' client support has agreed to pay
for five days of on-site training, and Kerr County will pay
for four days of on-site training. And this is a very good
deal. Technically, we should pay for all of the training.
JUDGE TINLEY: Better than half of it is being
~, donated by Tyler?
MR.. TROLINGER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And what's this going to do?
MR. TROLINGER: This is the on-site training to
teach the -- the process of handling supplements, and for
generating reports from the Tax Office.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: From the Tax Office. So,
this is Tax Office-related?
MR. TROLINGER: Exactly, yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, this is the -- the whole
issue as to why we've had Diane in here several times talking
about --
MR. TROLINGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Some people didn't get tax
2-23-09
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
statements.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tax statements, and some people
MR. TROLINGER: The entire issue is two-part; you
know, there's central appraisal and there's the tax office.
And I won't speak for those entities, but the troubleshooting
process in the software, troubleshooting process that goes
into that is what's going to be taught as part of this. And
the supplements are what you hear it referred to.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, we're paying for four
days and they're donating five, for a total of nine days of
training? Is that what you said?
MR. TROLINGER: Correct. When we're finished with
this, it will be a total of nine days on-site.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many people wi11 that
involve in terms of training?
MR. TROLINGER: There's one trainer from the
Software Group --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I mean to be trained on
this end.
MR. TROLINGER: -- and then five individuals.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Five? Okay. Move
approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second it.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second for
2-23-09
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on the
motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: John, I'm glad that we're
finally getting this instruction. Why didn't we get it up
front?
MR. TROLINGER: Good question. I didn't see the
problem coming. It --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you have a good answer to
it?
MR. TROLINGER: Good question. I didn't see the
problem coming. In January I saw the problem coming. I
said, "Hey, we need some training," before this erupted. And
we didn't get that training money allocated. It was too late
at that point anyhow.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nine days of training,
that's a lot of training.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Hopefully that will take
care of the problem.
MR. TROLINGER: I will comment on that. You know,
this process of -- of going through public disclosure or
public announcement, the news media and the -- and the
potential litigation, is really negative for the county. And
as far as right now, I have a small project that should be
about $5,000, and I just got a quote for $42,000 from the
vendor. And they're well aware of the problems that are
2-23-09
103
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
going on, and I think we're going to see some reluctance --
or some higher pricing as we go along with our vendors.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That may be a temporary
aberration, but the bottom line is if they do their job
correctly to begin with, there would be no negativity from
the County.
MR.. TROLINGER: Good point.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's true.
JliDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JliDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
J'~DGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 18; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
approve the Auditor instituting the purchasing order system
to comply with the audit risk standards and SAS 104-111, as
required by the A.I.C.P.A. This system will provide us with
internal controls that are required under those rules and
guidelines. Ms. Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: Good morning, Commissioners. As
you've seen, there's been quite a few e-mails going back and
forth concerning this -- the P.O. system. Last year when we
did the budget system, as you may recall, we talked about
doing a P.O. system at that time. We actually requested the
2-23-09
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
volunteers for the P.O. system that would be used to be
assigned an Incode on their computers. The purchase order
system, it's the nomenclature of it; the name of it says
"purchase order," and a lot of people feel that means they
have to get approval to get a purchase order or so forth and
so on. The way that the Incode system is set up, there's
really two ways to put in invoices. One is the manual system
which we're using today, which really limits the amount of
data that we can put in, the amount of information that we
I have in our computer database to be able to answer questions.
The second system is called a P.O. system, but it's really
just a requisitioning input type of a system, which allows a
couple of things to happen.
Number one, when you put in your requisition, it
automatically shows you what your budget is. Number two, it
automatically -- if, for instance, in Road and Bridge, when
they order a piece of equipment and it doesn't come for six
months, it automatically encumbers their budget so that they
do not forget, or we don't have to remember that they have a
$35,000 piece of equipment out there they're going to pay
for. And this goes through -- most of the departments are
going to be spending anywhere from 15 minutes to 30 minutes a
month on this. It is -- it is as easy as the budget system,
if not easier. What it does allow is, it has one person that
inputs. They just -- if they went to Office Max, they put
2-23-C9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
105
"Office Max"; they put the account number, which is the same
as they're doing now on the invoice. They put the amount.
They're done.
The vendors are already in the system. They don't
have to put those in, because we already have a tremendous
data bank of vendors. Once that's done, they send an e-mail
to their supervisor. If the supervisor wants that approval
level, they approve it. All they're doing is reviewing it to
make sure. It takes about five minutes. Once that's done,
it comes into our system; they are finished. That's all
there is to it. It provides them a log of what they've done.
It provides them an automatic knowledge of how much they have
left in their budget. It provides them knowledge if they've
gone over their budget, because it shows up in red, and it's
just like the budget system. It's just very quick. Most of
~I~ the normal large bills are still going to go through our
I, office. It's going to also cut down on the time frame.
Many of us -- for instance, sometimes we get bills;
sometimes they get them direct. But if we get a bill in our
office, then we have to put it in the box, and that day the
department head or the elected official comes down and gets
it. They have to have time to review it with their staff and
so forth and so on. But by the time we get it, sometimes
it's a week later, we get it back to put in the system.
Well, that delays it already a week, 'cause we haven't got
2-23-09
106
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it. When they get it, they can automatically approve it, put
it in the system, and it's ready for court, so that we will
now have -- instead of only having a week to put in bills, we
can go up to the Wednesday before court date to cut off, so
I, that means we get more of our bills paid in a timely manner,
I
I and it also means they don't have to run back and forth to
'~
I our office all the time to pick up mail, deliver mail and so
forth. Yes, sir?
II, COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ms. Hargis, this may seem
~I rude that I'm interrupting you, but I have a specific
question, and then if you answer that, then you can talk all
day long; I don't care. Audit risk standards required by
A.I.C.P.A.; I'm -- I'm assuming that that's your C.P.A.
organization. Why do I care what they want?
MS. HARGIS: You care what they want because if we
don't follow these standards, we'll get a qualified opinion
in our audit, and if our audit fails, we won't get a bond
issue and we won't be able --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's because you're a
C.P.A.?
MS. HARGIS: No, that's because you're required by
law to have an audit done by an independent certified public
accountant every year.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, the outside auditor.
MS. HARGIS: The outside auditors.
2-23-09
107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. All right.
MS. HARGIS: And the outside auditors must comply
with these audit standards.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: And in order to do that, we need to
comply with them as well. The internal audit controls are --
are filtering down to government. We had thought that COSO
model, which was all the internal controls that Enron set on
everybody, we thought we would avoid at the government level.
Unfortunately, those are filtrating down. And we haven't had
to go to the expense that a lot of companies have gone to to
I
put these into place, because they haven't got down to us in
-- as a hard fact of reality as they have for businesses.
But, basically, in businesses, every invoice has to be
approved. Every purchase order has to be approved. You have
to have a purchase order system. Everything has to run
I', through all of these different levels, and it's cost a lot of
', companies millions of dollars just to put these into place.
We can avoid this. We have this modular; it's been
on our system since the day it was installed. It's a very
simple modular. Most people are going to be putting in five
invoices a month. Some of them will be putting in two. The
bulk of the invoices will still go through our office. They
won't write the checks. All they're really doing is putting
in the invoices they normally would. Some of them use
z-2~-o5
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
spreadsheets now. This will provide them logs so that they
don't have to do their spreadsheets if they don't want to.
If they want to do them, they -- of course, they can continue
to do so, but it gives them more choice. Yes?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If she comes up for air, I
want -- I want to make a motion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quick question. So, they go
out there and they input on -- you know, in the system, a
purchase order.
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Then, you know, Rusty wants to
buy something; I don't know what he wants to buy. It comes
back, then the invoice comes in.
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does he just go to that
purchase order and then approve it? Does he -- how -- how do
you link the purchase order to the --
MS. HARGIS: You -- first of all, you establish
what they call a packet, which is the -- in the old days, the
punch cards. You basically put your entry in, and you have a
batch, and until you approve that batch, it just sits out
there. So, let's say Rusty was going to buy some cars, and
he wanted to go out and do a purchase order or a requisition
on the cars. He would do that requisition and he would have
2-23-09
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it i_n the data field, but he wouldn't approve it until he got
the invoice, and then he would put all the other costs
involved with that vehicle at that time. But that batch can
sit out there until such time as you're ready to approve it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 'Cause that was going to be
one of the questions I had. We use Krauss for car
maintenance, and -- and every one of my officers, if they
want to get maintenance, whether it's regular oil changes or
anything goes wrong, they have to get a purchase order. We
get that purchase order -- we do that in-house now. But
there is not a dollar amount tied to it, because until I get
the end-of-the-month bill from Krauss, I don't know what that
dollar amount is. But then we go back, because it does come
in with that purchase order number, and I can see whose car
it was and we can verify that.
MS. HARGIS: He has the ability to do that, okay?
He can set up a requisition from the beginning. He can use
the P.O. system that he currently has and only enter it when
it comes in. For instance, if I went -- if you want to go to
Office Max today, you went over to Office Max and you bought
$100 worth of office supplies, you came back, and all you
would have to do is -- is put your account number, office
supplies, the amount, say complete, approve it; it's done.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But can I -- can I enter the
purchase order the date that I --
-23-09
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
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Without an amount in it?
MS. HARGIS: Yes. It has a place for an estimate.
You can put in an estimated amount if you want to put it, but
you don't even have to do that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We don't --
MS. HARGIS: You don't have to do that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't want to put an
estimated amount that it's going to -- you know.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What happens to the -- the hard
copy of the invoice now when it comes in?
MS. HARGIS: The hard copy of the invoice will need
to come back to our office, and we'11 establish a time frame
for that to come in. The hard copies are kept in our office
for the auditors.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So -- but the copy comes
in. Right now, I don't know how the other offices are doing
it. We don't do that many right here. You know, I just
initial on the top of it, okay, to pay the one or two that I
have a year that come through. But that could now be done --
Jody can now just input it into the computer and say okay to
pay; I don't have to look at that invoice again.
MS. HARGIS: That's right. Then the invoice then
comes to our office when they're finished with it. We get
all the original invoices at the end anyway. The difference
2-23-09
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
is, now you won't have the time lag. Let's say you got it
today, and you wanted it to be paid at the next court day.
It also gives that
department head more of a hands-on, knowing exactly what's
going on in their department, because that picture shows up
in front of them. I've always said, as an accountant, when
you're doing a tax return or you're doing a set of books for
-- for an individual, you -- when you put in their invoices,
it tells a story, and you remember that story. So that this
-- a lot of times I think it's hard for the department heads,
'cause we -- they give us the bill. They don't always see
the picture as it flows through our system. This way,
they're getting the opportunity to see that. They'll also
have another copy; it will print a purchase order and a
requisition so that they can keep it with their copy if they
like. So, there's more paper involved.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only question I have,
because this is -- and not critical of the Auditor's office,
but in the last number of months, we've had way too many late
notices and late fees, and, you know, even Shell credit card
cut off for a week or two. If this will solve that
2-23-v9
112
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
problem -- okay? And where a lot of that problem comes from
is, some of our bills go directly to your office without ever
~i
coming to us, and then -- we got one last week where it had
gone to your office about the first part of February, and
it's time-stamped with the date it came. Well, then by time
we got it for my approval, it was cutoff date, and so it
didn't get approved, so now it's going to be March before it
-- you know, 'cause it couldn't come to the meeting. So, now
it's March. It's already over 30 days. Now it's 45 to 50
days, and we're going to get a late notice on that. Those
are the things that I think have to stop, and if this will
solve that -- can we tell those vendors that those bills come
either directly to us, so that we can input them? Or are we
going to get them -- a lot of it's more of just how quick we
get them from the Auditor's office to our office.
MS. HARGIS: We try to get them out as quickly as
possible, but we don't hand-carry them. We do put them in
the boxes. But we can address this issue. I wasn't aware of
it.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I mean, we --
', MS. HARGIS: But we do have a -- we do have a lot
of bills that go either to our office that have to be
approved by that elected official, because we don't -- we
want them to look at them and approve them. And, so, by the
time they go to their office, and they may or may not be
2-23-09
113
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
there on that date -- you know, we only get 10 days on most
of those invoices. That's a short time frame. And most of
the time our mail's not always real punctual by the time we
get it, anyway. So, I think it will solve -- it's not going
to solve all the problems, and we're not going to do
everybody right away. This is going to be a graduated thing.
I We're going to do the smaller departments first as test
cases, and then each month we'll add two or three departments
until we get everybody online. What I found when I was
working with this in another area, and we instituted it, is
that people in the field were very appreciative of it because
they now knew what their budgets were and they didn't have to
worry whether they were going over budget, and the bills got
paid in a much timelier manner.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When you say "knew what
their budget was," are you talking about what they have left?
MS. HARGIS: What they have left in that particular
line item. Every time they enter an invoice, it shows what
they have left.
JUDGE TINLEY: You had a question, Ms. Decker?
MS. DECKER: Yeah. I have a -- Jeannie, this
afternoon I'm going to go up there and I'm going to go online
like I always do, and I'm going to order $150 worth of
pencils and pens and cartridges and dah, dah, dah. So, what
do I have -- do I have to do something in the system first?
2-23-09
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Before I can --
MS. HARGIS: No.
MS. DECKER: -- even do that?
MS. HARGIS: No, you do not.
MS. DECKER: So I can go ahead and order it?
MS. HARGIS: All you're really going to do is very
likely do your spreadsheet. You know, when you -- your bills
come in and you enter it on your spreadsheet, instead of
entering it on your spreadsheet, you'll put it in, enter it
in that, and it will print out a log for you so you'll know.
In addition, it will show the amount in the budget remaining
on that log that you print out. No. In fact, the -- I would
encourage them not to separate it out as pens and pencils,
things of that nature, but I would encourage them to put a
line item, office supplies, or anything like that. Where
they might buy a printer, scanner, something they want to
keep up witri to see how long they've had it, but other than
that, I wouldn't try -- I would group most things, which is
what we do row. We have the invoice to back that up, anyway,
so -hey can expand or contract on what they want. And we
take everybody to training, and we're going to take
suggestions as to what they want. And I think once they see
the training and realize that this is even easier than the
budget system, and it's going to move things through the
system better, I think everybody's going to like it.
2-23-09
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
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You say in your agenda item
you're instituting the purchase order system. That tells me
that we already have it. It's parts of our package, and
there's no cost associated with acquiring this.
MS. HARGIS: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's already acquired.
MS. HARGIS: It came as part of the original
package.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's in the Incode package.
MS. HARGIS: Yes, it always has been.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I know they're --
MR. TROLINGER: Jeannie, I have a question for you.
Will this involve a purchasing agent in your office? Or will
I still be allowed to choose the vendors that I purchase from
for the --
MS. HARGIS: No.
MR. TROLINGER: -- non-biddable items?
MS. HARGIS: Go back to the term that I used.
Unfortunately, the modular itself is called Purchase Order,
but it's just really putting your requisition in.
MR. TROLINGER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: What it will do, however, I'm given
to understand, is if -- if the amount of the proposed
acquisition reaches a certain threshold, if it's required to
be bid, it will prevent you from buying that directly until
2-23-09
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
you comply with bidding procedures.
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
JTJDGE TINLEY: Or if there's a stopgap that
requires, in the larger departments, maybe the elected
official or department head's approval because of the dollar
amount that's established, it'll lock that out until that has
I been met.
MR. TROLINGER: Yes. And, certainly, it won't
allow you to spend more than is in that line item, and that's
a great control right there.
MS. HARGIS: Yes. It will lock it down, and it'll
be -- then you will have to contact my office to take it off
of override. But, for instance, John, for you, it will be
very good for when you order a big bulk of computers, and,
you know, the order's out there and it's coming in piecemeal.
It ties that -- it encumbers that budget for that amount so
that you know until it gets done.
MR. TROLINGER: Sure. I don't have to have a
spreadsheet on it any more and do all my own accounting. I
can just use the system.
MS. HARGIS: Right.
MS. UECKER: And I'm okay with that. The question
I have is, why did some of -- why do some of the bills that
need to go to the department heads go to you now?
MS. HARGIS: I can't answer that, Linda. The bills
2-23-09
117
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that have been coming to my department, as far as I know, are
the same ones that have always been coming. We -- I mean,
sometimes if the address comes to us, we try to forward it as
quickly as possible on to the department heads. And many
times, if we see your name on it, we don't even open it; we
bring it directly to you.
MS. DECKER: I think probably an effort that you
need to make is maybe contact that vendor and say, "You need
to send this directly to that department," 'cause I've got
some that come to me, some that come to you, from the -- you
know, for the same things.
MS. HARGIS: I can't -- I really can't answer that.
I think it's just been something that's evolved over time.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would it not be appropriate for the
department that's making the order to say, "You send this
billing direct to me"?
MS. DECKER: I can do that, and I have always done
that. I always make a point to tell the vendor, you know,
the bill needs to come to me so I can get it to the Auditor.
'Cause somehow they started going to the Auditor. I don't
know if --
MS. HARGIS: I think part of the problems came to
be when the vendor gets a check that they receive, and the
check they receive has our address on it, has our suite
number on it. Because the checks --
2-?3-09
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
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: -- have the Treasurer's office on it.
I think that many times, that's what the vendor will do. If
the check comes from a certain address, then -- and they know
that's where the check is coming from, then they -- that's
where they tend to bill, 'cause they know that's where
they're getting their money.
JUDGE TINLEY: Then the department that's ordering
it probably is in a better position to say, "I'm placing this
order; you send the bill directly to me." And that probably
would help get that done. You had a question, Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only suggestion I was going to
make, I know there's some department heads, in all the
e-mails that were going around, that were a little leery
about this. From what I'm hearing, I don't mind if -- for
now, if she wants to use our department, 'cause we do have a
large number of bills, you know, even on a daily deal.
Instead of starting with the small ones, if she wants to
train Nancy and I on doing this, and we use our department to
do it for the next month or two, and report back to y'all on
how it works, so you can -- I don't have a problem doing
that, to where we can get -- since we use our own P.O. system
already anyhow, just -- it may make it quicker.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You want to be the guinea
pig?
2-23-09
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
MS. HARGIS: I have a lot of the smaller
departments --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I have no problem doing it.
MS. HARGIS: Julie, actually, Trevino has actually
been working with -- when Ken was here last year, and we
started already working with Julie; actually did some
experimental work with us last year, and so some of the
~, smaller departments we need internally and externally. But
if that's -- if we started with one big department and two of
the small ones, the -- really, the only glitch that we found
when I instituted the system in another area was when you set
up the approval levels, sometimes it just doesn't work.
There isn't any rhyme or reason to it. You have to go back
in there and do a little correction. That's the reason why
we want to be sure that we let each department try it to make
sure that the approval levels are flowing through. And what
happens is, because of internal control, they want a person
to :input that -- that doesn't have the authority, and then
they want the one to authorize it that has the authority.
Like, in Linda's office, for instance, Robbin might enter
them and then Linda approves them. And -- but they don't
have to do it that way. They can do it that way.
MS. DECKER: I'll probably be doing both.
MS. HARGIS: That way it shows electronically the
levels of internal control. To give you a small idea, I just
2-23-09
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
120
I
finished over the weekend, because I -- I've not enough hours
in the day, 50 pages of an internal control document for the
external auditors to answer how every single department in
this building does their bills. And next year we will be
able to say we are using the system; I don't need to answer
these questions.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Mine would be very simple. I
have a secretary that's going to enter them, and I'm going to
approve them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I like the Sheriff's
suggestion, to start with the large department because of the
sheer volume of what he does. If there are going to be
glitches, you're going to uncover them in the Sheriff's
Department more easily and more quicker -- or quicker than
you would if you do a little small department. So, I like
the idea of the Sheriff first.
'~ MS. HARGIS: Okay. We are going to do training,
though, first for everyone. The training will take place --
it'll probably take about a half an hour, and as soon as we
can get that set up, we'll let everybody know. If there are
people who can not be at the training, we will personally
come to their office and train them.
!, COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is this going to reduce the
I work for your office?
MS. HARGIS: My work?
2-23-09
121
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I2
13
14
15
16
17
I8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is this going to reduce the
workload in your office?
MS. HARGIS: Not really, not that much.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Why not?
MS. HARGIS: The reason -- I was really hoping,
when I instituted this before in another area, because when
the -- even after they do the entry, it comes into what I
would call the fish bowl. All the batches come into a fish
bowl, and at that point they all have to be checked again by
my department to make sure that they balance. Because if
they don't balance, or there's an incorrect -- wrong number
or wrong vendor number, then it won't -- the report won't
', pull. So, unfortunately, it doesn't reduce our load that
~I much .
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'd like to second that
motion, please.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval of the agenda
item for the -- to institute the purchasing order system as
proposed by the County Auditor.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JLDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second.
Question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(Commissioners Baldwin, Williams, and Letz voted in
favor of the motion.)
2-23-09
122
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
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(Commissioner Oehler voted against the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, the issue of sending
bills to the wrong place, that -- Linda's more familiar with
it than I am, but that came in Noah's Ark, probably. I mean,
I remember ever since I've been here, we've had that problem
of the bill going to the Auditor's office, and when it really
needs to go to the Sheriff and all. That's always been
there. You're familiar with Noah's Ark?
MS. UECKER: Yes.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: She was here during that time.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's kind of what I was
wondering. I didn't want to say that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. UECKER: What happens is we end up having Cliff
Clavin deliver the mail now. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Section 4 of the agenda;
for one, payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for payment
of the bills. Any question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have one, under
Nondepartmental. Walker Group, photocopy expense, $2,400.
-23-09
123
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 2,400?
MS. HARGIS: We order all the paper for the entire
building, and then --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: -- then it's parceled back out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Page 3. We are paying a lump sum
over to Kimble County Treasurer for 198th D.A. Is that going
to be transferred to Kerr County eventually? Is that going
to be handled out of Kerr County?
MS. HARGIS: The 198th?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MS. HARGIS: No. Oh, you mean the 198th -- the
probation? This is the probation.
JUDGE TINLEY: No, D.A. That's the District
~ Attorney.
MS. HARGIS: That's our pro rata portion -- lump
sum portion.
MR. BARYON: I'll be delivering a report here in
just a second and be available for questions.
MS. HARGIS: I'll let him answer that one.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The only other comment I'd
make is on Page 21, indigent health care, much sweeter
number, gentlemen. Much sweeter.
2-23-09
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: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Indeed, it is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good work down there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions 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. Do we have
any budget amendments?
', MS. HARGIS: No, sir, we don't have any at this
i
time. But I will say, and as a caution, we're already
running over budget in many of the departments, and not
excessive, but we have some. And I just want to make
everybody aware that we need to be as frugal as possible,
because we do have tight budgets, and we need to keep those
in line.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, when -- are all -- are
all of the -- I mean, I'm sure you can run a report that
shows anyone who's pretty far out of line. I think it'd be a
good idea to run a report; just send it to the department
head or elected official so they're -- make sure they're
2-23-09
125
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
aware of it.
MS. HARGIS: We have. We are in the process of
doing that now. And we generally call them when we see that
there's a line item. I'm finding many times -- and, again,
I'm hoping the P.O. system will help with this as well.
Sometimes they code them to the wrong line. You know, and
then we -- they're -- we fix it. So, it's not really a
budget amendment. But I just wanted to caution all the
department heads that we really need to start watching it
now.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any late bills?
MS. HARGIS: No.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly
reports from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2; Justice of the
Peace, Precinct 3; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1; District
Clerk; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4; and Constable,
Precinct 3. Do I hear a motion that those reports be
approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for the
indicated reports to 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.)
2-23-09
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
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we have
any reports from Commissioners in connection with their
liaison or committee assignments --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- as designated? Commissioner
I Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner Baldwin and I are
still working with the City on the ETJ issues, and as far as
everyone being aware that the -- we gave a 90-day notice
period a while back; then we asked them to go -- to modify
the agreement to give them 30 days notice. They chose not to
do that. As a result, we are not in compliance with the
state law on ETJ. Anyone who files plats in the ETJ will be
going -- the City has no authority to handle them right now,
other than their own jurisdiction.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Really?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Up to the City. And we put in
their policy; they said they didn't want to go further. So,
that's where we are.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
2-23-09
127
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Hmm-mm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any reports from elected
officials or department heads?
MR. TROLINGER: The Tyler Technologies Software
Group client support head will be here tomorrow and
Wednesday. I'd like to encourage all the courthouse
officials and department heads that use the software system
to meet with Mitchell Spence. He especially wants to meet
with the County Attorney's office. They're here to find out
what we're missing and what we need training on to -- to
focus in on that to follow up on the Tax Office issues.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. District Attorney?
MR. BARYON: Good morning, still. I wanted to just
look everybody in the eye and be available for questions, if
somebody was wondering what we're doing down the street.
We've got some good things going, good things to report. We
-- I just pulled up the jail census, and Rusty's got, I
think, 150 guys in jail right now. Only 15 of them are mine.
I've got --
JUDGE TINLEY: So, we need to talk to somebody else
if we got a problem with the 135, right?
MR. BARYON: Yeah. I'm just reporting the facts.
Seven -- seven of the 15 are less than 30 days old, so those
are brand-new indictments. So, that number I5 is just
2-23-09
128
1
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: Not yours any more, are they?
MR. BARYON: I say calf rope; I did my part.
(Laughter.) Ten of my 15 have cases that are pending in
other courts, either federal court, 216th, county court, so
that -- that does raise an underlying issue that cooperation
between the feds, the sister district court, and the county
court is important, and we're continuing to foster that, and
I think that -- that 15 pending cases reflects that. We have
-- and I want to report a new hire, to the extent that we're
obligated to. I'm sure many of you have heard we have
brought on Mike Chapman, Kimble County Sheriff, to be an
investigator with our office. We're instituting a new
program to assist area law enforcement with traffic
enforcement on the highways, as well as drug interdiction in
-- in the district, primarily on those roads that go from Del
Rio to Fort Worth, El Paso to Florida, primarily the heavier
traveled roadways, trying to complement what local law
enforcement are doing with user-level narcotics by going
after larger level narcotics. So, it's not in place of what
2-23-09
129
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
our area law enforcement are doing, but as a supplement to
that .
Let me brief on you our direct file system. That
is in the works, and this is tied to two other issues I
wanted to address with you. We've got our computer -- our
hardware components of our computer system implemented, all
of that purchased at no taxpayer expense. That is -- that's
on the ground and running. The software component of that
that is going to help us be more efficient is still in the
works. Dell was about three weeks behind on their getting
their computers to us, so we're a little bit behind the curve
on the implementation that I had anticipated. That will
allow us to move into our direct file system that I'm working
with our District Clerk on, and the District Attorney in our
sister court, to get cases in our system some 60 to 90 days
earlier than they're currently getting in there. That will
have a direct impact on the Sheriff's jail population, and we
expect very good things out of that. Our clearance rate
right now of cases is excellent. I think we -- we've pled
some 20-odd cases last month, and indicted a little over 30,
so that's great. We had a jury trial success a couple of
weeks ago. Brad, our new assistant District Attorney, got 11
years on a breast-fondling case. That's fantastic, so I
think our -- our jurors and the new assistant, Brad
McCullough, can certainly be commended for that good work for
2-23-09
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
the D.A.'s office. Any questions? Oh, one other thing. We
negotiated a vehicle exchange. The -- my predecessor had a
very nice vehicle that we were able to negotiate an exchange
on to get three patrol units in exchange for this one
vehicle, so we've got -- we traded this Yukon for a Charger,
which is kind of the preferred vehicle for working on the
highway, a Tahoe that's fully rigged out for law enforcement
and -- and has the police package and all that, and a Ford
pickup that is going to be used for the office director-
slash-investigator, Kyle Dean. Again, all of that done with
no impact on our budget, and at no taxpayer expense.
JUDGE TINLEY: Question.
MR. BARYON: Yes, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: Are we going to start handling in
Kerr County all of the accounting for your office?
MR. BARYON: Probably not.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. BARYON: The -- I don't know exactly how that
change-over would work. Right now, I'll give -- the status
is, we have Davidson, Freedle, Espenhover -- you know, the
local firm keeping our books and making sure --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Keeping your books or
auditing your books?
MR. BARYON: Keeping our books. The -- and I'll
expand on that just a little bit. They're writing the
2-23-09
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
checks, doing all the accounting, making sure the state
reporting is done. And the -- as far as the County doing
anything, Kimble County is, I guess, considered the main
', county. Really, all they do is take our budget; they submit
I
the request to the other counties, and all the other counties
write a check into Kimble County. A check is then written
from Kimble County into the D.A.'s operation budget monthly
pursuant to a submission -- or a request to get submitted
from our office. So, there's really no accounting that
Kimble County is doing. They just facilitate just moving
this money around. Each county commissioner -- commissioners
court will, of course, be given all of our annual
expenditures, especially related to the Chapter 59 seizure
fund, as required. And that's part of the reason that we're
moving that -- we're outsourcing that, to make sure -- number
one, to add an arm's-length element to the accounting.
Secondary, to make sure that it's done in a language that you
guys can understand, that our auditors can understand, our
outside auditors, and the state audit can understand. 'Cause
as a lawyer, I don't have any business speaking C.P.A.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doesn't Kerr County support
the largest piece of your budget?
MR. BARYON: That would be correct. I think the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why, then, would it not be
appropriate that all of the financial transactions flow
2-23-09
132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
through Kimble County. There's one transaction per month.
Basically, there is a -- there's a repository county, and I'm
guessing -- I'm getting a feeling that you guys would be
interested in having Kerr County --
JUDGE TINLEY: Good perception.
MR. BARYON: -- be the place for that. And maybe
if we could get to the root of why you -- you're interested
in doing that, I could facilitate the discussion.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe you can help us in
this regard. Maybe you can draw for us the distinction
between the way things are handled in the 198th, financial
transactions, as opposed to the way financial transactions
are handled in the 216th.
MR. BARYON: That would require that I have an
understanding of the way that 216th does things.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That maybe we'd have a
better understanding of why someone else is doing it instead
of Kerr County. Just a thought.
MR. BARYON: Would Kerr County like for us to
move --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm getting a no.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We don't want to grow the
Auditor's office any bigger than it is.
2-23-09
133
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. BARYON: There might be a root issue that I'm
not understanding.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think the root issue is if the
funds are on deposit in Kerr County, that would be preferable
than the funds being on deposit in Kimble County.
MR. BARYON: I see. The funds would never be on
deposit with the county, per se. The funds are on deposit
with the bank.
JUDGE TINLEY: In Kimble County, as compared to
Kerr County.
MR. BARYON: That's correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. BARYON: That's correct. And they provide a
good service, a good interest rate and all that. You know,
without a reason to move that, I don't -- I don't know that
there would be good cause to do that. But, you know, that's
something for the future.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Because we're your biggest
and best buddies, that's one good reason.
MR. BARYON: Anything else?
JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
MR. BARYON: Thank you for the harassment.
~ Appreciate it.
2-23-09
134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: I just have one other thing that I'd
like to report on. I don't know if y'all are familiar with
House Bill 1039. About a month ago, the Judge asked for us
to put our list of our checks out on the web site, which we
did. But there is a bill that is in front of the Legislature
right now that may be enacted immediately, and so I kind of
want to make y'all aware of it. It is called the
Transparency Act, and basically what it says is that we will
put our check register out on our web site. But the -- the
glitch in it is that it has to be put in an Excel format that
can be sorted by the taxpayer, and that they can drill down
into, let's say, Office Max to see how much money we paid
Office Max for the year. It is going to be very expensive,
and it's being kind of fought by a lot of auditors, because
we can't figure out how we're going to get the software to do
what they want us to do. But they may make it effective
immediately, which is this month. They also may make it --
you don't think so? Have you heard?
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think you'll get a bill
passed this month.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Still has to be signed by
the governor no matter what.
MS. HARGIS: They're talking -- well, that's what
the Listserv is telling us, but we're hoping it doesn't.
2-23-09
135
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
They're also talking about raising it to 50,000 population.
MR. TROLINGER: And I'll support the Auditor on
this. It is a terrible piece of legislation from an
information technology standpoint. There's no definition.
There will be 253 counties doing it differently.
MS. HARGIS: Collin County Representative Paxton is
carrying the bill. I will try to forward you their website
so you can look at it to see what they're doing, but they are
doing a similar situation. We can put an Excel format out
there, but drilling down to see what that vendor's paid for
the -- since he's been, you know, a vendor for this county is
going to be a real problem.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You may -- just a suggestion;
maybe visit with your people upstairs, the two judges, and
have them get word to the Legislature that this is a bad
bill. I mean --
JliDGE TINLEY: Bad old bill.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is bad.
MS. HARGIS: I don't mind us putting our list out
there, but I think the drill-down situation is really a
little bit ludicrous.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But if this thing has a -- is
moving quickly, amendments can be placed quickly on bills.
So, I mean, something can be done to fix some of the real
onerous problems and keep the intent there. So -- but we
2-23-09
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
need -- Legislature only acts when they're told to.
MS. HARGIS: Would y'all mind i.f I contacted
Representative Hilderbran and asked him to oppose it?
JUDGE TINLEY: I've got no problem with you
twisting his arm any way you can get ahold of it, but I think
Jon's suggestion that -- that you advise your judges that
maybe they should -- they could be of some assistance by
letting their operation be known, not as to the transparency
in general, but as to the -- all this search -- search and --
and all this other stuff that has to go on with it. We don't
mind everybody knowing what's going on. We just don't want
to be paying for a lot of different software solutions for
people to be able to sort and pick and so forth at the info.
We'll get them all the info.
MS. HARGIS: And if I could ask y'all, if you hear
anything about the bill that I not might be aware of, if you
could let me know? Sometimes you hear before I do. I'd
appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll hear from TAC.
MS. HARGIS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Williams?
MS. WILLIAMS: I just -- I wanted to reiterate what
the Auditor said earlier about things being tight. I just
wanted to make y'all aware that I am a little concerned on
our moneys. We do have some C.D.'s we just purchased, but if
2-23-09
137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we could possibly ask department heads and elected officials
to be really frugal on their spending, I'd -- I'd appreciate
it. Because right now, as you are all aware, there are no
really good vehicles out there for us to find a high interest
rate in. We're doing the best we can, but it's -- it's going
to get tight, so I just want to make the Court aware.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is the tightness on the
expense side, or is the tightness on the transfer of tax
money into the general account?
MS. WILLIAMS: I think it's a little bit on both
sides, actually. Now, we can't control what the utilities
are going to be or certain other things.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand.
MS. WILLIAMS: And we can't control our --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not budgeted earlier. I
think there will be some overages having to be paid because
of not figuring enough insurance money to be paid, for one,
as an example, for our health insurance. We will see which
one of us wins, me or the Auditor, when it comes to those
figures.
MS. WILLIAMS: And --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: At the end of all this in the
fourth quarter.
MS. WILLIAMS: And Commissioner Letz had asked
earlier about our ad valorem coming in. I went ahead and did
2-23-09
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
up a spreadsheet, and I gave him a copy of it, and I can pass
this around. We're pretty close; we're about, what, 500,000
off of what our total was for last year. So, we've still got
February, which is usually a pretty big month.
MS. HARGIS: We have a much higher levy, so we
should be a little bit closer. I think we're going to see --
usually, a lot of the first week of February is January, so
that really picks up in the month of February. I did look at
our sales tax, because I got a call from the City, and we
were very conservative in our approach there. We did not
raise our sales tax over what we had last year; we kept it
level, so we are actually $35 off. They are actually about
$35,000 off for just one month at the City. So, we're okay
on our sales tax. It's -- actually, we're doing better than
the City is on the sales tax. It's just I think that a lot
of folks had a little bit more leeway in their office
supplies and things of that nature in the past, and as you
recall, they all cut a lot of those areas to be able to -- to
come up with -- and that's where we're seeing it. We're
seeing it mostly in their -- their day-to-day operations, you
know, versus -- we still have quite a bit of money in the
fuel, but all of the departments are very conservative with
that. And they're concerned that when we get into the summer
months and they start running more runs out in the field,
that they'll need that gas. So, I really don't want to -- to
2-23-09
139
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
use that money. But I -- I think it's just an overall not
being used to being as tight as we are. We've always had a
little bit of fluctuation, and we really just -- when we did
this budget, we didn't allow for fluctuation in the
departments themselves, and that's the problem.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir, that's it. Just wanted you
to be aware.
JUDGE TINLEY: Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, just along the lines of
being tight, and something I -- I truly would like some
honest guidance on. As y'all know, in my budget, we've been
trying to pay out every bit of new overtime or holiday time.
I haven't been letting it build up, which has put my budget
very tight. In fact, we're right at the limit on the
overtime and holiday time. I don't know if it's the
consensus of this Court -- problem is, now what we've been
facing is giving the time back of f_. I can lower those bills
by letting them go ahead and build that back up in their
holiday or comp time bank instead of paying it, starting to
put it away in a bank, but I just -- it's going to catch up
to us sooner or later. Just whatever the guidance would be
on it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd rather keep paying it.
MS. HARGIS: Want to keep paying it?
2-~3-09
140
1
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: To me, yeah, that's
something -- a liability we need to get rid of.
JUDGE TINLEY: It has to be reduced. It's going
to --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Can't carry it over every
year.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what's been happening.
So, we're getting control of it, Bruce, but there is just --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I appreciate that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: -- a lot there, and more than
I've got in the budget, to be honest.
MS. HARGIS: So, there will be some amendments on
that on this next go-around.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else? Any other
reports? We're adjourned.
(Commissioners Court was adjourned at 12:10 p.m.)
2-23-09
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
141
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 27th day of February,
2009.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
Kathy Barik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
2-23-09
ORDER NO. 31207
APPROPRIATIONS FOR KERRVILLE/KERR COUNTY AIRPORT BOARD
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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 request from Kerrville/Kerr County Airport Board to take some of their existing
reserves for engineering on the Airport Water Line Improvement Project, not to exceed
$75,000.00.
ORDER NO. 31208
RESOLUTION FOR 2010 CENSUS
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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 Resolution in support of the 2010 Census, and authorize County Judge to sign
same.
ORDER NO. 31209
HILL COUNTRY MOUNTED PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION USE OF HILL
COUNTRY YOUTH EXHIBIT CENTER
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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 Hill Country Mounted Peace Officers Association being added to the non-
profit list for use of the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center.
ORDER NO. 31210
KERR COUNTY TREASURER'S JANUARY, 2009 MONTHLY REPORT
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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 Kerr County Treasurer's Monthly Report for January, 2009.
ORDER NO. 31211
DANGEROUS WILD ANIMAL ORDINANCE
Came to be heard this the 23rd day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Oehler, 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 10:00 a.m. for amending or
changing or otherwise modifying the current Dangerous Wild Animal Court Order.
ORDER NO. 31212
PHASE I OF BOERNE FALLS/PRIVILEGE CREEK RANCHES LETTER OF
ESCROW
Came to be heard this the 23rd day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 3-0-1 to (Commissioner Letz Abstained)
Approve Phase I of Boerne Falls/Privilege Creek Ranches, and release Letter of Escrow
G.F. No. 07072IK in the amount of 5349,082.53, that is to expire July 24, 2009.
ORDER NO. 31213
NAME PRIVATE ROADS
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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 Road Name Changes as follows per 911 guidelines:
1. Unnamed road to Barbarosa Trail North in Precinct 3 (Cypress Creek to
Holekamp Road, with Barbarosa Trail North located off of Holekamp Road)
2. Unnamed road to Reata Ridge Road N.W. in Precinct 4 (Hwy 83 to
Dominion Ranch Road to Private Road 3019, with Reata Ridge Road N.W. located off of
Private Road 3019)
ORDER NO. 31214
FUNDS FOR PAYMENT OF NEW ROAD AND 20 COUNT PARKING LOT FOR
HILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY MHMR CRISIS STABILIZATION UNIT
Came to be heard this the 23rd day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 3-I-0 to (Commissioner Baldwin opposed)
Authorize the Road and Bridge Department to build a road and 20-count parking lot for
the Hill Country Community MHMR Crisis Stabilization Unit, with the funds to come
from the Road and Bridge Department Emulsion and Aggregate Line Items in their
current budget, subject to the Sheriff, County Attorney and the County Judge working out
an Agreement with the MHMR Crisis Stabilization Unit that they will accept Kerr
County patients at this location.
ORDER NO. 31215
2009-2010 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)/COLONIAS
FUNDING FOR OSSF REPLACEMENT OF FAILING SYSTEMS FOR LOW
INCOME HOMEOWNERS
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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:
Authorize the Application for the 2009-2010 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG)/Colonial funding for OSSF replacement of failing systems for low income
homeowners living in designated areas of the County where public sewer is not available.
ORDER NO. 31216
FEE PAID TO JURORS AS REIMBURSEMENT
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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:
Accept recommendation of the District Clerk, and approve setting fee paid to Jurors as
reimbursement, effective April 1, 2009, in compliance with SB 560 which has re-written
Gov. Code 61.001, as follows, and cancel all previous orders relating to same:
$10 per day for the first day the person is in attendance in Court in response to a jury
summons; or
$30 for first day a juror reports and is actually selected and sworn to a jury panel whether
or not testimony is heard; and
$40 for second day and each additional day of service whether or not the prospective
juror was selected to a panel
ORDER NO. 31217
TEXAS ELECTRONIC FRAMEWORK STANDARD SERVICE LEVEL
AGREEMENT
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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 the Texas Electronic Framework Standard Service Level Agreement, and
authorize the County Judge to sign same, subject to the review by the County Attorney.
ORDER NO. 31218
USE OF 2008 CAPITAL LOAN SOFTWARE TRAINING FUNDS FOR THE TAX
ASSESSOR/COLLECTOR'S OFFICE FOR DISBURSEMENT SYSTEM
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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 use of 2008 Capital Loan Software Training Funds for the Tax Assessor
Collector's Office for the Disbursement System.
ORDER NO. 31219
PURCHASE ORDER SYSTEM
Came to be heard this the 23rd day of February, 2009, with a motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously
approved by a vote of 3-1-0 to (Commissioner Oehler voted against):
Approve the Auditor instituting the Purchase Order System to comply with the Audit
Risk Standards and SAS 104-111 as required by the AICPA.
ORDER NO. 31220
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 23rd day of February, 2009, came to be considered by the
Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	171,195.00
14-Fire Protection	$	17,398.00
15-Road & Bridge	$	29,996.48
18-County Law Library	$	2,548.43
19-Public Library	$	33,333.33
21-Title IV-E	$	118.50
23-Juvenile State Aid Fund	$	33,888.59
27-Juv Intensive Prog-State	$	3,878.00
28-Records Mgmt & Preserv	$	166.50
32-Comm Dev Fund Grant	$	22,680.00
39-Grant H-Misdeamor Div	$	9,748.88
50-Indigent Health Care	$	7,741.34
70-Permanent Improvement	$	25.52
76-Juv Detention Facility	$	6,695.31
77-LEOSE Funds	$	315.00
82-SO Law Enforcement	$	213.00
83-216t~' District Attorney	$	1,624.09
TOTAL $ 341,565.97
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts.
ORDER NO. 31221
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 23rd 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 the Monthly Reports from:
JP #2
JP #3
JP #1
District Clerk
JP #4
Constable Pct #3