1 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, January 26, 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 v cr 0 N 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 l3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I N D E X January 26, 2009 --- Commissioners' Comments 1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on presentation of County Treasurer's monthly report for December 2008 1.2 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to acknowledge receipt of quarterly investment report from Patterson and Associates for quarter ending 12-31-08 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve declaring one computer printer stand & one plastic computer desk as surplus property Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to declare a dark brown metal 5-drawer lateral filing cabinet as surplus property Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to ratify and confirm the Statement of Grant Award for FY 2009 Formula Grant from Task Force on Indigent Defense; authorize County Judge to sign 1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on requests from appointed and elected officials to appoint clerks and assistants for their offices pursuant to Local Government Code Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to modify Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Kerr County and the City of Kerrville for regulation of subdivisions within City of Kerrville's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to appoint Commissioners Williams and Letz to represent Kerr County in negotiations with various governmental agencies for interlocal agreements that may be required for the Center Point/Eastern Kerr County Wastewater Project 1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to prepare and forward to TWDB an Intended Use Plan for transmission line portion of Center Point/Eastern Kerr County wastewater project as required between Center Point and Comfort PAGE 6 9 11 12 13 13 14 16 17 21 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I N D E X (Continued) January 26, 2009 PAGE 27 1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to prioritize county projects for stimulus funding 42 1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to release letter of credit for road in Lasso Ranch Subdivision and accept the road for maintenance 57 1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to either decrease letter of credit for Ranches of Sunset Ridge or request a maintenance bond be issued for a year to finish remainder of items to be completed 59 1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to go out for annual bids for road base, cold mix, aggregate, emulsion oil, and corrugated metal pipe 63 1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to adopt a resolution opposing wastewater discharge at Hill Country Camp on Harper Road 64 1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve agreement between Kerr County and Groves & Associates for project management services for Center Point/Eastern Kerr County wastewater project 92 1.18 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to receive update from Kerr County Tax Assessor and/or Kerr Central Appraisal District concerning problems with tax statements and/or notices, and how to prevent problem from happening again 97 1.17 Consider/discus, take appropriate action to allow County Attorney and County Auditor to pursue remedies involving Tyler Technology 98 1.20 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on proposed agreement between the Kerr County Historical Commission and Schreiner University 123 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 I N D E X (Continued) January 26, 2009 PAGE 1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to discuss various county revenue sources and placement of funds 130 1.21 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action regarding demotion due to decrease in job duties 157 4.1 Pay Bills 162 4.2 Budget Amendments 165 4.3 Late Bills --- 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 167 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee Assignments --- 5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads 168 --- Adjourned 169 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 On Monday, January 26, 2009, at 9:00 a.m., a special meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in I 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 posted and scheduled for this ', time and date, Monday, January the 26th, 2009, at 9 a.m. Commissioner Letz is here. I thought he'd come in by now, but -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He'll be back. JUDGE TINLEY: -- he'll be here just shortly. Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: We'll turn it over to you this ~ morning. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Will you please rise and join me in a moment of prayer followed by the pledge of allegiance to our flag. (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you very much. At this time, if there's any member of the public that wishes to be heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item, this is your 1-26-09 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 opportunity to come forward and tell us what's on your mind. If you wish to be heard on an agenda item, we'd ask that you fill out a participation form. There should be some at the heard. If, for some reason, we get to an agenda item and you wish to be heard, but haven't filled out a participation form, just get my attention in some manner and I will see that you have the opportunity to be heard on it. But right now, if there's anybody that wishes to be heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item, feel free to come forward at this time and tell us what's on your mind. Seeing no one coming forward, we'll move on. Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's a little damp And it missed it by two days; usually the rains come and the cold comes when the stock show is in play at the Ag Barn, on this particular weekend just past. Just my thanks and appreciation to the young people and to the Hill Country District Livestock Show Association. It's always a pleasure -- seriously, always a pleasure to see those young people working with their animals and to see what they have worked so hard over the course of a year to produce and bring to the show. It's a pleasure to watch them; they're a great bunch of kids, and -- and I hope the sale was successful, 1-26-09 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 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't have anything today. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, we're going to put the removed in years because we've -- you know, the dry has been good for that, but not good for anything else. But I don't know. I talked to one of the contractors the other day. He tells me there's been in excess of 1,200 loads taken out of that thing, and some of those being 12-yard loads, some of them being 6, 8. There have been people coming with trailers and buckets and everything else, getting a little of it to put on their flowers or whatever. But it's been a good thing, and it's time to plug it back up, because we're going to get into the time of year when the -- when the bass fishermen will be getting on us for not plugging it if we don't do so. And also, spring is coming, and those trees will start sucking up that water. And, good lord, I hope he brings us some rain before spring, because if we don't, we're 1-26-09 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 going to have even a slower river flow than we have now. It's really pretty sad. Anyway, that's enough of that. That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I want to echo my colleague's thoughts about the stock show and those kids out there. Just absolutely fantastic to see a part of society that conducts themselves, in my view, in a proper way. You know, just -- my favorite part is to see those kids, whether there's -- it's first place or 30th place, go to the judge, look him in the eye and shake his hand and thank him for his service, and what a thrill that is. I mean, your character and integrity and all those things that's the fiber of our country is being built right there, and it just thrills me to see that, and what an honor it is to be a part of that. That is all. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. You know, I've said it before, and I think it deserves emphasis. As the juvenile judge in this county, the young people that I don't see in my court and in the juvenile justice system are the young people that are participating in those programs and similar programs; not just the ones involving animals and agricultural products, but the 4-H programs which are much, much broader than -- than animals and agricultural products. They deal with self-esteem, character building, leadership, 1-26-09 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 9 all sorts of life skills, and -- but those are the kids I placing maybe too much emphasis on developing those programs and the expenditure of funds on those programs, I think the proper response is, that is the place to spend the money. That's where you get the most return, because you develop the right kind of children and the right kind of young people into the right kind of adults that make the kind of citizens that we want in this county and in this country. So, I think it -- it needs to be remembered that these programs are extraordinarily good for developing young people generally in the various life skills, and I'm tickled that they asked us to -- to work with them on these programs, and it's a lot of ', fun, and I think it's extremely worthwhile. Let's get on with our agenda. The first item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on the presentation of the County Treasurer's monthly report for December 2008 to Commissioners Court for the Court's examination and acceptance. Ms. Williams? MS. WILLIAMS: Morning. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Good morning. MS. WILLIAMS: You have a copy of the December 2008 Treasurer's report. If there are any questions, I'd be more be than happy to try to answer them for you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The bills are as you 1-26-09 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 reflect them in the affidavit; is that correct? MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Williams, I have, I think, one question, and I'm sure there's an explanation. Maybe without all your multitude of figures, you are not in a position. The capital project account? MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: I believe that's an '07 capital project account. It shows a cash balance as of December 31 of 857,002.66. MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: In another space, under Fund 16 -- excuse me, 2008 -- it shows 863,510.99. MS. WILLIAMS: The difference between the TexPool capital projects account and the Fund 16, Fund 16 is included in the pooled cash at Security State Bank, and it also shares in the pooled cash interest. The TexPool account only has the TexPool interest in that amount. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So, there's the approximate $6,500 difference. MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: That's the basis for that? MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. I appreciate that explanation. 1-26-09 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 11 MS. WILLIAMS: You're welcome. I'm glad I could do that. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need to accept? JUDGE TINLEY: You're seeking the Court's acceptance of this report? MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we receive the -- accept the report. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. ~I JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for acceptance of the report and approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the III motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll move to Item 2; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to acknowledge receipt of the quarterly investment report from Patterson and Associates for the quarter ending December 31, '08. Ms. Williams again. MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. This is -- we've -- we do this every quarter. It's our quarterly investment report, 1-26-09 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and basically I just need you to acknowledge receipt of the investment report from Patterson and Associates. COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item, and acknowledging receipt of same. 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 also. MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: We will move to Item 3; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to approve declaring one computer printer stand, Inventory Number 201, and plastic computer desk, Inventory Number 2655, as surplus property. Ms. Pieper? MS. PIEPER: Yes. Gentlemen, we're just getting some more stuff out of the office that we're not using, declaring it surplus. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in 1-26-09 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 13 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. Item 4; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to declare a dark brown metal five-drawer lateral filing cabinet, Inventory Number 000255, as surplus property, cabinet having been removed to the Juvenile Detention Center's storage room. MR. GARCIA: Morning, gentlemen. JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, sir. MR. GARCIA: We won't need to do that. We're going to go ahead and recycle that into Ms. William's office, so it'll be moved to her office and be used in another capacity. JUDGE TINLEY: Always good if we can use that stuff ourselves, isn't it? MR. GARCIA: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Let's go to Item 10; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to ratify and confirm the Statement of Grant or Award for 2009 Formula Grant from Task Force on Indigent Defense, and authorize County Judge to sign same. I note Ms. Hargis is on there as well as myself. This is our portion of the Court of Criminal Appeals Task Force on Indigent Defense. Funding is approximately $26,000, as determined by their formula. The 1-26-09 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Court previously approved the participation in the program. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- the $26,317. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carries. Let's move to Item 11; consider, discuss, take appropriate action on request from appointed and elected officials to appoint clerks and assistants for their offices pursuant to Local Government Code Chapter 151. As the Court's aware, we've taken this action in prior meetings for a number of offices. Hopefully this is the end of the needed requests for the appointment and employment those various deputies and clerks. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval. Question or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I just have a simple question. This is the third time we've done this, and I'm not real clear -- I'm not real clear why. 1-26-09 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 JUDGE TINLEY: Let me get the County Attorney to answer that. JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: They're the ones for Maintenance. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we do -- next time, can we do just a blanket? JUDGE TINLEY: You know, Commissioner, I think that's exactly what we're -- this came at us at a very late hour, if you'll recall, I think shortly before the swearing in on January the 1st. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: And a number of departments got their necessary paperwork in at that time. Then there was some more at our first meeting in January, and now this is the balance of them. But I suspect that for the next year, we will do that all in one fell swoop, as per the -- the personnel schedule. I suspect that's the way it will go henceforth. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. Let's don't get the County Attorney involved in this thing. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, just for the record, I 1-26-09 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 think you can probably all see, this is for the Maintenance Department and Animal Control. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, mm-hmm. MR. TROLINGER: Judge, I have a question on the agenda item. JUDGE TINLEY: Yes, sir? MR. TROLINGER: Is Information Technology required to submit this form? I don't collect any fees or whatnot, but I have -- I have drafted the form; I do have it today ready if it's not too late to submit it. ', MR. EMERSON: I think it's prudent to submit it. MR. TROLINGER: Okay. Should I submit it through the County Attorney or yourselves? JUDGE TINLEY: Here. It now includes I.T.? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Includes I.T. as well. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Hopefully that's the end of it. 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: That motion does carry. Let's move to Item 12; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to modify interlocal cooperation agreement between Kerr County and the City of Kerrville for regulation of subdivisions 1-26-09 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 within the City of Kerrville's extraterritorial jurisdiction as follows: Section 1, the duration of the agreement and termination of Item B, to change 90-day notification for termination to 30 days. Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda. We've been working under a 90-day period trying to get this reworked, and the -- the current period expires, I believe, the first week of February. And City Council's aware that we're doing this. Rather than do another 90-day period, I really want to get this thing wrapped up. I think Commissioner Baldwin and I are pretty close to being done with our part of this. So, I'd just like to amend the agreement to a 30-day period, and hopefully the City Council will do the same. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: That was a motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That was a motion. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 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. (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 13; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to 1-26-09 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 appoint Commissioners Williams and Letz to represent Kerr County in the negotiations with various governmental agencies for interlocal agreements that may be required for the Center Point/Eastern Kerr wastewater project. Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. As we get into this project a little deeper and begin the planning process with the funds authorized by the Texas Water Development Board, we're going to have to begin some discussions and hopefully enter into negotiations with others with respect to this project, and so what I'm asking the Court to do is to let Commissioner Letz and I represent the County in these negotiations. And, of course, we'd bring back any proposed interlocal agreements with the complete explanations and so forth. It's something that has to be done. We're going to be meeting with Comfort W.C. & I.D.; there are going to be others. We're going to have to be talking to TexDOT with respect to use of their highway right-of-ways and so forth and so on. And, so, that's the purpose of this motion. Move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why don't you let us do I that? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't do you that? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll make the motion to approve the agenda item, with a question. 1-26-09 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 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Actually, we got two motions and a second, I guess. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You don't want to appoint yourself. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's talk about -- let's talk about the various government agencies. You mentioned TexDOT. Who else might be involved? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Comfort W.C. & I.D. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER LETZ: City of Kerrville. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: City of Kerrville is another possibility. Upper Guadalupe River Authority is a possibility. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: City of Kerrville because they're still -- that option of coming this way with it is still on the table? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's still totally unresolved, still open. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So there are at least three or four. There may be others. COMMISSIONER LETZ: T.W.D.B. may be another one. 1-26-09 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 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Water Development Board is another possibility. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Because of money. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Money and ongoing application issues and so forth. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So, all -- all -- everything left to do, basically, y'all want to go in and negotiate with them and get everything -- dot all your I's and cross all your T's? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can -- I had this discussion as to why we're doing some of this right now with Commissioner Williams a week or so ago. The phase we're at now with the current grant, we need to decide where we're going with the wastewater. That's part -- that's probably the biggest thing that we're looking at right now, as to deciding whether it's going east or west, and get an idea as to, you know, how you get there, if you're using the state right-of-way or buying private right-of-way. I mean, those are the decisions that have to be made during this current grant that we -- has been funded. And, really, it's kind of the -- the put-up phase, because if we can't work out a deal with somebody as to who's going to treat the wastewater, there's -- we're not going anywhere. And that's kind of -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Y'all have a goal of when the drop-dead date is of making that decision, east or west? 1-26-09 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 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It'll come in this phase of planning, which should be eight -- six to eight months of planning, this particular phase we're in right now. It should come. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or will come. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Will have to come. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to Item 14; to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to prepare and forward to the Texas Water Development Board an intended use plan for the transmission line portion of the Center Point/Eastern Kerr County wastewater project as required between Center Point and Comfort, the intended use plan to be offered for consideration as part of the proposed federal economic stimulus program. Commissioner Williams again. 1-26-09 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 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, we all read about projects, water, wastewater particularly, any -- any funding that comes down from the federal government under the economic stimulus plan, those dollars will go to the Texas Water Development Board, and they will make the determination of what's eligible, what's good, what's bad, what's indifferent and so forth. We keep hearing and reading about for projects, and that is an intended use plan, an I.U.P. In talking to our engineers, they suggested that we should probably take a look at the Center Point/East Kerr County project and divide it for this purpose only, not for the purposes of the Water Development Board. Our application is in place, and it's a complete project, and they're going to take a look at it as a complete project. But for this purpose, we should take a look at it and separate the transmission line part -- portion, which goes from Center Point to Comfort, across the county line, and -- and break that out from the entire project and file an application through the Water Development Board, and state that it is an Intended Use Plan and seek funding for that particular part 1-26-09 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of the project. The funding for that project could be as much as $4 million, that piece of the project, as we know it today. Who knows what it'll be tomorrow? And so that's what this is all about. We would -- we would prepare some form of an application, submit it to the Water Development Board, and we would then provide it as an intended use plan. We make certain that our current application, which includes that transmission line, does not touch at all; it continues to perk through Water Development Board and go through all the hoops that is required of it. So, that's the purpose of this. It's all part of the proposed federal economic stimulus program. It may not be funded, but it's a situation where it behooves us probably to put a little bait in the water and see what happens. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I probably differ a little bit with Commissioner Williams on timing on this. I think it's -- I think we should wait. I know -- I know the -- and I heard Mr. Groves give his recommendation, but I really don't want something to go out to the press and tell Water Development Board that we're doing some kind of a deal with Comfort Wastewater C.I.D. Number 1, or whatever it is, until we at least have a pretty good agreement with them that we're going to do it that way. I think that there could be -- cause a problem. I think we should -- you know, I think we 1-26-09 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 can have a meeting with them in the next two weeks -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- and see, and then I think this should be deferred till next agenda. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a question, though, before you do that. Would you do the same thing if -- if the words were between Center Point and Kerrville? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, because there's a -- there's a cost for that line as well. I think it's about $2 million to do it this way, or two and a half, as I recall. It's going to be closer to four going eastward. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you change that particular language and just -- you know, you're specifically talking about Comfort here, and if you took that and changed it -- I mean, it seems to me -- I understand exactly what John's talking about down there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good point. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But you'd -- I still think these kind of things need to get in the pipeline ASAP. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We could change it, and as -- by what you're suggesting, and change the language, talking about that line required between Center Point and the treatment process plant, wherever that is. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I can go with that. I just 1-26-09 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 25 don't want to pin it down. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, because it kind of defeated what we just got through doing. I mean, sounds like to me you've really made a decision here. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Clearly, the -- it is much -- and from my standpoint, anyway, a benefit to the county to go east. Coming to Kerrville really doesn't help eastern Kerr County. It helps maybe City of Kerrville some, and that's fine. But the idea is to try to get -- we have a lot of pretty high-density developments between here and Comfort, and it would be a big plus to get those all off of septic right next to the river. And there's also the water component -- drinking water component of it. So I think, clearly, it's the -- if possible, the way to go is to Comfort. If that doesn't happen, I think we have to look at, you know, going to Kerrville. I mean, because we can't unilaterally say it's going to Comfort. They may have a change of heart and say, you know, they're not interested. So, I think that we need to be prepared to go either direction, or at least look at each direction. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't disagree with that. You're absolutely right. So, we could change it as required between Center Point and a wastewater treatment plant. That leaves it open. JUDGE TINLEY: I'm not sure we can modify the 1-26-09 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 agenda item, though, as it presently exists, for action today, is my point. MR. EMERSON: You can do a -- you're not restricting the agenda item. You're -- if any -- well, let me -- it's less restricted; it's a more open-ended order than what the agenda item is. I think it will probably work, as long as you don't say Kerrville. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So what are you saying? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do it. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: What's he's saying is we can. MR. EMERSON: If the wording, as is suggested, to just go to "a wastewater treatment facility" is sufficient. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I would offer it as a motion with that change, for the transmission line portion of the project, as required between Center Point and a wastewater treatment facility. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we have a motion. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: And a second. Further question or discussion on the motion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just want to make -- make a point. This is -- this is a work of art. We're talking 1-26-09 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 27 about pumping poo-poo here, and it being a part of an economic stimulus program, a federal program. I think that's wonderful. It just works perfect. It fits. JUDGE TINLEY: Does that sound like something politicians would do? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Exactly. This is a wonderful -- this is a wonderful moment in county government. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this good stuff? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is good stuff. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: At least it's worthwhile. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, at least it could go uphill or it could go downhill. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I was going to say, we're not talking about pumping right now, are we? JUDGE TINLEY: Do we have any other questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's now go back to Item 5, which is a 9:30 timed item, and that item is to consider, discuss, take appropriate action on order requiring registration of dangerous wild animals. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 Commissioner Oehler? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I think there's no secret to the fact that we had a big -- big cat get out of his cage over on Beaver Road a week ago Sunday, and this has caused a lot of things to happen, and one of them is to review what the Court adopted in 2001, as well as to go and look at what the state requirements are to house these kinds of dangerous animals and what the regulations are involving owning one. I had no knowledge of this when I came back on the court, but I sure got a lot of education within this last week, I assure you. And I think there are some residents -- in fact, I know there are some that were in the area where the cat did escape, and one in particular, Mrs. Crenshaw, it was in her back yard, I believe, where they actually tranquilized it. And I believe they probably have some things to say about this, along with other residents in the area. Judge, did you have any participation forms? JUDGE TINLEY: I did, as a matter of fact. You're ready for me to proceed with that? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I am ready for you to proceed with it. JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Mildred Crenshaw from Ingram has asked to be heard on this item. Ms. Crenshaw? MS. CRENWELGE: Well, first thing, all you can get is that she's complying with regulations. But it also says 1-26-09 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 right here in your laws that outdoor primary enclosures, 1,000 square feet, uncovered, shall have vertical jump walls at least 10 foot high and 45-degree inward angle overhang 2 The inward angle fencing should be the was barbed wire. Also, if your officers had not gotten there when they did that night and stopped the animal down at the corner of Beaver Road, it would have been in .Ingram just as easily as in my back yard. There's nothing but a bridge between there and Ingram. And also, that animal can rear up on its back feet, the way that her cage was, and his paws -- or her paws, pardon me, stick over the top of the fence. I know the law may say a certain heighth, but whenever inspection was made, it looks to me like when they can see that the paws stick over the top of the fence, there's something wrong there. And plus it says in there that Commissioners Court, by order, may prohibit or regulate the keeping of any wild animal in the county. And I think it's ridiculous to have an animal like that in a neighborhood that's populated. And it isn't a very pleasant thing to wake up in the morning with -- at 3 o'clock to have a tiger in your back yard, and not know what's going on. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. Is there anyone else here present that wishes to be heard with regard to this 1-26-09 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 30 particular agenda item? Yes, ma'am. Please come forward, give us your name and address, and -- and give us your thoughts on it. MS. LEITNER: Well, my name is Anke Leitner. I'm the owner of the cat, and I would like to address what Mrs. Crenshaw just said. First of all, I'm terribly sorry that she did get out. It was a freak accident that she did get out. Some of the wire, somehow she got tangled up in it, and probably was trying to get out of it. We -- nobody really knows what actually happened, how she managed to do so, but from looking at it afterwards, I assumed that this is what it was. Also, to one of the items where she said that she can reach across the fence standing up, that is not correct. There was no way for her standing up straight, reaching over the fence. I mean, it -- it is my enclosure, and I know that there is no way for her to reach over like it was just documented. At the same time, all week long I'm having two welding crews out there building a new fence -- new cage for her. It is a complete enclosure, including a roof on there, including a keeper's gate, that would be for any vet, official, me to have access to the cage if we have to. Also, there is another feeding gate being installed that is approximately 18 by 20, that if I have to feed her, that I don't even have to open up the cage. We have a complete 1-26-09 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 perimeter fencing around it. On top of that, there is additional perimeter fencing around that. I'm using the existing cage as new perimeter fencing, and I'm building a new -- complete new cage, completely closed inside. And, like I said, I mean, we -- we have crews working out there all week to come in compliance and make sure that something like that will never ever happen again. And, like I said, for me, that's the worst. She obviously is not an aggressive cat. There were many people stating that, seeing that. I mean, yes, she was walking down the street, but, you know, there was no way that, you know, she showed any aggression. I mean, I was even ready to actually put a rope around her neck and walk her home, which she is used to. I walk her on a regular base. I spend time with her on a regular base. She is very used to human beings. I had several vets even before stating that she is probably the most tame tiger that they've seen in a long, long time. So, I mean, that's what I would like to say. Again, Mrs. Crenshaw, I'm really sorry that she did end up in your yard. There's nothing I can do except ask you for your apologies -- I mean, I'm -- I'm sorry. I want to ask you to accept my apology, of course. And, I mean, that's all I can say. I'm really sorry for the incident. I will make sure that it's not going to happen again. MS. CRENWELGE: Well, it wasn't supposed to happen 1-26-09 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 __ ~'' this time. MS. LEITNER: Oh, they are finishing up today. I have two welding crews working out there. It took us till Wednesday to finally figure out what actually we all need to do with the -- with the regulations of the state, with material to use. There were a few gray areas, of course, in the regulations, and I think we all came to an agreement. I mean, I talked to Bruce about it. I talked to the Sheriff about it. Me and Janie, we are working very closely together to make sure that everything is up to code. We have covered two areas since that day. I have two welding crews out there working. Friday night they were working till 12:30 at night; you probably seen the lights. Saturday night we were working till 9:30 at night. Last night we were working till 11 o'clock at night, all day long, just to make sure that we are getting ready and everything is going to be safe. MS. CRENWELGE: Well, as I say, I'm -- I'm not the only one that's affected by it. MS. LEITNER: That's basically what I have to say. Thank you, gentlemen. MS. CRENWELGE: Just wound up in my yard. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else that wishes to be heard? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I just have one question of Anke. She just stated that she puts the rope on it and walks 1-26-09 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 it. Where are you walking that cat? MS. LEITNER: It was in her enclosure. II SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Inside the enclosure? Okay, thank you. I already told her if it got out again, there's liable to be a tiger rug in my office, because we're not going -- I can't take the chance. There are a lot of kids that live in the area. MS. LEITNER: I previously did so. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. MS. LEITNER: I previously put a rope on her and walked her within the area, just to exercise and teach her '~, some manners and, you know, basically keep her trained. I ~I got her since she was a baby. She's used to that. I mean, I ~~ used to walk her on a regular leash when she was little. I was just able to pick her up, just to keep her exercised, and understanding between me and her going. So -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. MS. LEITNER: -- it will be inside, I promise you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Anyone else that wishes to be heard on this item? Yes, sir? If you'll come forward, give us your name and address, and give use your input on this subject. MR. BROWN: David Brown, 120 Beaver Road. I understand that she is coming up to compliance with the rules. I haven't read them or anything. Is there a 1-26-09 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 34 guideline or something that somebody goes out and inspects yearly or annually or something, semiannually, to make sure that each year, that she is up to compliance? Because if she's coming up to compliance now, what's happened before? Has she been waiting this long to be able to let the cat do what it wants, and now, since it got out, she's having to come up to compliance? I think there should be a -- at least a yearly inspection of all dangerous animal cages or whatever, so that they are kept in compliance. JUDGE TINLEY: I think the -- my understanding, Mr. Brown, is that the State, since we adopted this order, has made some modifications to the -- to the specifications that are required for the type of enclosures, and some additional requirements, and that there is now an annual inspection that is required -- MR. BROWN: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: -- of the facility, and a registration of the animal itself. That's my understanding. Is that correct, Ms. Roman? MS. ROMAN: Yes. And we have also decided that we are going to inspect every other month as well, just to make sure that this never happens again. MR. BROWN: Okay. MS. ROMAN: And I'll make sure that the Sheriff has all of that information as well; has pictures, has a diagram 1-26-09 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 of the enclosure, has everything, has copies of our inspections, everything. But we will be doing this every other month, and then, of course, every year doing the -- the big inspection. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's the requirement of -- MS. ROMAN: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: -- the statute, is the annual registration. MS. ROMAN: The annual inspection, yes. But we are trying to go above and beyond by doing this every other month, just to make sure that this never occurs again. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. Anyone else that wishes to be heard on this item? Any member of the Court have any input they'd like to offer? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. I still have -- I think that, you know, we need to revisit what the Court has adopted and what's in force at this time. I tend to agree that at some point, you know, I think some other counties have banned the ownership of dangerous animals. Of course, Kerr County being one of those who has many, many different kinds of exotics -- of course, they're not all considered to be dangerous wild animals, but I would like to see us, in the -- in the very near future, revisit this and possibly make some changes to our order, one of those being to grandfather the ones that are here now, because it's kind of -- kind of 1-26-09 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 hard to take somebody, you know, that already has one and then tell them all of a sudden they have to move or they have to get rid of it. But I think, over time, the animals will not be here any longer; they'll die. And if we can ban it to the point where we don't have any more coming in in the future, I think we'll be doing ourselves a favor. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And doesn't -- doesn't the law -- I vaguely remember adopting this thing years ago. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But it seems like to me they actually listed the type of animals. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They're listed in the order. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Is this animal one of those? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes, he is -- she is. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I think we need to revisit it, too, because I -- my memory says that -- that the order says you're not allowed to have them. But -- but does it say you -- you can't have these unless your cage does this and this and this? Is that what the -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what it says now. And if you -- and with the other state stuff that is here, it tells you how big, how high, what kind of materials it'll be and all that kind of thing. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And that makes it okay. 1-26-09 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Now, what about -- the State of Texas says we want you to adopt -- or you can adopt this law, but we want you to do the inspection. We want an inspection, but we want you to do it. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, whenever -- when you adopted this order back in 2001, it threw it from the state onto us. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's up to us now to enforce -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- that ordinance or regulation or whatever you want -- that order. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, you know, I think that you can throw a rock in any direction on this thing and you'd hit somebody at fault, other than the people that live there. And, you know, the good thing that's coming out of this is that there will be better inspections. There will be documentation of that. The owner is sure enough on notice now, and she is sorry the cat got out; of course she is. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. ~~ COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I mean, that's the right attitude to have with the residents that were affected by this. And I thank the good Lord nobody got hurt. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Commissioner, I have two 1-26-09 38 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 questions, and really probably more directed to the County Attorney. The list of what a -- I guess a dangerous animal is, is lions, tigers, ocelots, cougars, leopards, cheetahs, jaguars, bobcats, lynx, servals, caracals, hyenas, bears, coyotes, jackals, baboons, chimpanzees, orangutans, gorillas, or any hybrid of these animals. So, I mean, it's -- obviously, there's animals that are not on that list that I think are probably dangerous, but it's kind of -- it's a pretty good list. I guess we -- can we modify that list? And I don't need an answer now, but when we put it back on the agenda, can we allow bobcats, but nothing else? You know, just an example. MR. EMERSON: That list is acquired from the state statute. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but -- anyway, but later on it says we can regulate or something, or ban it altogether. My question is, can we modify this list to allow some and not all? And second question I have is, in the regulations, can we put an acreage size or -- or have areas where you could have them, and not other areas that you cannot? Can we designate those? You know, those two questions. Can we modify state law that way? And that's just a question for when we -- MR. EMERSON: Part one is a maybe, okay? Because 1-26-09 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 animals are, and they're listed, so you're probably not going to be able to do that. Part 2 is yes, I think you can. You have the ability to add onto the regulations to make them more restrictive. JUDGE TINLEY: Would you feel more comfortable doing a little bit more research on that before you came down solid on it? MR. EMERSON: Absolutely. JUDGE TINLEY: That's -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm not asking for that order to be modified today. I think there'd have to be some public hearings and things that are associated with changing this ICI order. But I do -- I do really feel like that as we divide this county up in smaller pieces, that areas are going to get smaller and smaller to house; you're going to have more II!, population, and I just don't think it's a good idea to continue with it forever. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is the existing order we adopted in 2001, I believe; is that correct? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And so what we're talking about is what today? How to strengthen it? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How to -- whether we want to modify it in the future, or whether we just want to leave it alone. 1-26-09 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 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I have a question, then, through you to the County Attorney. Section 822.113, which talks about offense and penalty, it doesn't say -- it just says a person commits an offense if he violates whatever sections of law. Doesn't say what type of offense that is. Is that a misdemeanor, class whatever-whatever? MR. EMERSON: It's Class C. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can we put that in there so everybody knows what it's all about? JUDGE TINLEY: It's there. MR. EMERSON: It's in there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Where is it? JUDGE TINLEY: Next page. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Next page? MR. EMERSON: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second page. JUDGE TINLEY: Boom. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, there it is, stuck way down on the bottom. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else to offer in connection with this particular item? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Does the order -- you mentioned earlier that state law has changed. Do we need to modify our order today to at least bring it up to current state law? Which I guess -- I mean, we -- 1-26-09 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 41 MR. EMERSON: I think you're already there, because your order actually reflects statute numbers. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. EMERSON: The fact that the statute numbers changed doesn't affect the order. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I'm just glad that things have worked out like they have and nobody got hurt. That was the main thing. It would be real serious otherwise. And hopefully we will revisit this in the near future and -- and strengthen it a little bit where we can, and hopefully at some point they'll be banned from the county. JUDGE TINLEY: I think the issue of acreage probably is relevant too, as Commissioner Letz inquired, as it goes to population density. I think that's a good thought to have. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, I think so too, because it has to be disruptive and dangerous to have a cat -- whether he's tame or not, he still makes racket at certain times of the day and night. And being as cats are somewhat nocturnal, I believe nighttime is when they're probably the most active with their growling. And I know some other people that have had that experience besides on Beaver Road. JUDGE TINLEY: Almost as bad as peacocks, huh? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, now -- 1-26-09 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 42 JUDGE TINLEY: Noise-wise. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would say yes. Peacocks and guineas have a way of doing that too. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, that's right. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's move on, if we might, to -- to Item 15; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to prioritize county projects for stimulus funding. I put this on the agenda. Our -- our congressional representative, Congressman Lamar Smith, his office has asked for us to make our submissions of stimulus projects by -- February the 13th is the current deadline that they've given to us, and that's right around the corner. So we need to, I think, come down solid on -- on what it is we want on a priority basis. So that -- I realize that we had a workshop and came up with a rather lengthy grocery list, all of which are excellent projects, and each of -- each of the members of the Court had input onto that list. But I think we need to kind of winnow that down to what we really have as priorities on a county-wide basis for -- for submission for stimulus funding. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We submit that straight to Congressman Smith? JUDGE TINLEY: That's -- yes. That's what the Congressman has asked, that we submit it directly to his office, and they will marshal it forward from there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, I recommend maybe we 1-26-09 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 ', have, at our next meeting, a workshop at 1:30 or so to -- we can each bring our list portions of it, and then we can prioritize it at that point. Or -- I mean, to save time from doing it -- when's our next meeting? JUDGE TINLEY: The 9th. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 9th. We made a list, but I think we probably need some more specifics with it, and as to exactly what is -- you know, I know we have all the bridges that came out of the Highway 39 issue. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. Well, all the off-system bridges. I think there's what, seven of them? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That -- I know -- I feel sure that two of mine are -- are already somewhat funded, but the rest of them I don't believe are funded, and those are i really -- the engineering and stuff is being done as we speak, and shovel-ready is going to be pretty soon. ~, COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Those kind of things, if you're talking about infrastructure, those are not only infrastructure. They're dangerous, most of them. ~~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then we have a couple at ~, the airport that we have a pretty good handle on. What I ', think we need to be real specific on in the list is, I think, the wastewater projects. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 44 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We talked about dams and lakes and so forth -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- as well. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Those dams, sure enough, need to be on the list for funding to do the repair on those if possible. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah. Yeah. If we can get I~ lake cleanup on there, it would be good too. JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds to me like we're doing our prioritizing right now. Does that sound like it to you, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It do. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what it sounds like to me. I like that. JUDGE TINLEY: We -- I prefer not to wait, I'I, Commissioner. It's not just a matter of making a list and saying, "Here it is." There's a lot more documentation that needs to go with that, and it's going to take some staff time to put all that together, and I don't want to wait until the 9th to nail it down. If we're going to do it on a workshop ', basis, I'd like to get it done maybe the tail end of this week at the latest. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree. ~I JUDGE TINLEY: If we can't do it today. 1-26-09 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can do it today. I think we -- pretty much, we h ave enoug h to get going on, anyway. ~ COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We already have the study on the dams completed from Freese-N ichols. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Basically, the -- well, we do have the C.D. that goes with it to show -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- the damages. We have an estimated cost. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In 2007 dollars. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. So that, you know, I consider that to be something that could be presented and possibly get funded. COMMISSIONER LETZ: We could get the -- obviously, from Mike Coward, we ought to be able to get exact location. I know they've done some of the engineering on all the ones in my precinct. But we can get that list from them with the -- whatever backup they have ready. The airport information, we can get that -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- from the Airport Board. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I've got two bridges in -- in my territory -- my precinct. One is an off-system bridge and the other is an on-system bridge. I guess it's 1-26-09 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 on-system; 1350 at Government Crossing. That's a state highway. And the other one is the one that crosses underneath the dam at Center Point. What I'd like to know from TexDOT is the extent to which they have -- we need to know that, the extent to which they have engineered the off-system and come up with estimated costs, and whether or not they have come up with any estimated costs for improvement of Government Crossing as well, and get those both in there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two other projects that are in the works in my precinct related with Road and Bridge, after probably two years working off and on on it, right-of-way and some road work on Lane Valley. I think -- Leonard and I met last week on that; we have a pretty good idea of a cost on that one, I think. We can come up with it. And also, there's an -- MR. ODOM: Infrastructure. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- infrastructure project in my precinct that we can get information from Len Odom on. JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds to me like you and Leonard are kind of on the same page there. He's reading your mind. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, we try to communicate. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I tell you, TexDOT has all these things. They're doing all their own engineering design work now. They have some new young ones out of -- just out 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 47 of school that -- that they're loading them up with projects to do, because they're -- they can't contract for it any more, and they're moving pretty quickly on especially the projects on Highway 39 and 1340 bridges. They're able to knock those out pretty quickly. I even met the other day with them on two of those -- three of those bridges up there, and they -- they're going to be ready, I think, to -- they'll have, I believe, about 60 percent of the design engineering done within three days. JUDGE TINLEY: These are off-system? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: These are on-system. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other projects we COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The off-system, I have two that they'll have ready within the next 30 days -- or less now, because it was -- I met with them 10 days ago, to get to that 60 percent part to where we'll have a community -- you know, have a little neighborhood meeting with the people that are affected by those bridges to let them have some input, also explain what's going into those projects. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Basically, they're -- for Commissioner Letz' information, at the conclusion of the economic development breakfast the other morning, I met with Mike Coward just for a second, TexDOT, to talk to him about our meeting with him to begin the discussion on -- on 1-26-09 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 easements and so forth within the TexDOT right-of-way on the sewer projects. I'm wondering if we couldn't review with him where they are on certain things and bring some of that information back. We could set that meeting up, again, pretty quickly. One of the things I'd like to pick his brain some more about was -- was a project I brought to the Court last year, which would require a good bit of economic stimulus and -- but it would be a major improvement for Kerr County if it was ever completed, and that would be a tie-in -- a road that ties -- comes across from 173 -- State Highway 173 at -- before 2771, Lower Turtle Creek Road -- Leonard and I have talked about this -- and comes across in the vicinity of Brinks Crossing and ties into the Airport Loop Road at Highway 27. That would be a good thing to have in terms of looping our traffic, particularly as our airport continues to grow and that traffic begins to increase. We haven't done anything other than talk about the fact that it would be nice to have, and so I think somehow or another, I'd like to see if we can develop that, at least get some estimated ideas of what the cost might be. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The City has that on their master -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They don't have it at that location. They have it up around Guadalupe Heights. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 1-26-09 49 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somewhere in that area. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, anyway, they have it. The other thing that we need to add -- the Judge is writing down a list -- is the Ag Barn. That's ready to go from the standpoint of at least going for basic funding. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We can make it green and we can collect water and we can do all kinds of things with that to make -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: But everything we've listed except the last one Commissioner Williams did, we have a fair amount of documentation already built up. JUDGE TINLEY: The -- the TexDOT projects, I think they are prioritizing those themselves, and I think a lot of that's going to be controlled by whether or not they've got the engineering completed. And Mike Coward mentioned the other day that he feels like for this district, in particular, here right -- right here in this Kerr County area, they're in pretty good shape because they have a bunch of projects engineered, sitting on the shelf, just waiting for somebody to plug some money into them, and they're ready to go. They -- they can let them immediately, because all the engineering is done and it's just a matter of letting them and doing the documents and turning them loose. So, it occurs to me that anything that falls under TexDOT's responsibility umbrella, which I guess would include 1-26-09 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 on-system bridges but not off-system, would be something that we would leave under their umbrella, and -- and we would concentrate bridges, for example, on the off-system, and the projects that have particularly county connection. I have written down the -- the dams, the Center Point/East Kerr -- that's probably more than what we should be submitting, but I think we've -- we've got everything pretty well stacked. Can we come up with a prioritization on those? Hopefully we can fit within these guidelines and summaries that have been furnished to us. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd like to add one more to -- standpoint of -- of the County's liability near-term. One's going to be the new water line at the airport, which is going to require fire suppression. That's going to have to be funded, and that's something that right now the City and the County are going to have to come up with that money out of our budgets. So, I think -- I think in the priorities, I think we have to look at to a degree as to which ones are we most likely to have to spend our taxpayer money on in the near future, and that comes real -- that's one. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That, for sure, would be one 1-26-09 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 LETZ: I would put that real high on the list, because that's going to -- that's money that has to be spent in the next couple of years, and it's -- it's city/county money. JUDGE TINLEY: That would probably be the only other source of funding. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. That will not be funded by TexDOT. The other projects we have a match and the City has a match that we're obligated to -- but I'm not sure that's going to get changed a whole lot. I think these will probably be -- you know, I think we're going to have to come up with a match one way or the other, but the water line project is not fundable by TexDOT. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with you; it ought to be on the list. And the exact amount that's going to be required is still unknown, because you will recall that some members of the Airport Board challenged the proposed solution that was given to them at the last airport meeting. So, there may be a solution out there that's less expensive than the $600,000 that was prepared, but it needs to be on the list. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But I think we can get a -- the City has a high side number that they have pre-engineered. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's it. 1-26-09 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. And that number -- I mean, that can be submitted, and if you get less -- I mean, if we -- if a different alternative comes up, that would be possible. That, you know, could be done in a less expensive way. That -- and to me, that's a high priority one. The off-system bridges, if TexDOT gets money, we don't have a whole lot of control on that. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, we don't have any I control. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a priority to get down for the county, but it's kind of lower on the list. The -- the dams, to me, are real high priority, 'cause we don't have the money for that. That needs to be done, and the clean-out of Flat Rock and -- well, all the lakes is a high priority to me. The Ag Barn's a high priority, but not as high, because I think that -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There's other foundation funding. COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's also a little bit more discretionary, not a public safety issue or something. Yes, we'd love to have it, but -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see it a little bit different. I think that the Youth Exhibit Center should be higher because of the -- the word "stimulus" funding. To me, 1-26-09 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 that's what it's all about, is -- is the money is supposed to come here to stimulate economy and those kinds of things. I don't see that -- I mean, I have to stretch my brain to see Mr. William's system down at Center Point going to Comfort or Kerrville, how that has anything to do with stimulus. But you can. You know, if you think about it for three or four months, you can figure out a way to see that, how it enhances the living conditions in the Center Point area, and maybe some structure, et cetera. But the Youth Exhibit Center, I think, is just -- to me, is the top of the list with -- with the stimulus thinking. It's not only Ag Barn, stock show, but community center as well. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Educational. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Educational, conventions, all of those things that stimulate the economy. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Why don't we just name it 1-A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, what I'd like to do is see if we can't find some consensus here as to -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just voted. JUDGE TINLEY: -- what we put at the top of the list. Well, let's see if anybody else says that the Youth Exhibit Center is numero uno. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd say it's in the top three. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would say the top three. 1-26-09 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would too. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And the wastewater deal, you know, that's going to be environmental. You can tag it with an environmental, because of being on septics, you know, to get people off of septics, and -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Environmental. It's also economic development. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Also economic, yeah. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It -- it would be the top three. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm with Jonathan. The off-system stuff's going to get funded; TexDOT's going to have all the say about that, and whenever they get the money, they get the money to do those. And even their own system stuff is going to be funded the same way. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the reason I put the airport -- I'd put the airport in the top three, certainly, and the reason is that one water project, however it's done, because we can have no more roads at that airport until we fix that problem. It has to be done. We're shut down because we don't have the water flow to do fire suppression. Something needs to be done on that. JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else on board with that? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm okay with that. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 1-26-09 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 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And our dams and lakes has to be up there. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we've already got three top three, so now we're going to be talking about top four. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd put the -- I'd put the dams and lakes and off-system bridges four and five. Probably wastewater, three, and then the other two can sort themselves out. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm almost with you. JUDGE TINLEY: Which is one? Which is one? Somebody commit. Buster committed. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I committed. JUDGE TINLEY: He didn't have a problem with it. Anybody else join him on the Youth Exhibit as number one? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'll put -- I'll agree with him, put that as one. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll go along with that. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Airport, two. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, I'll go along with I that . COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll go along with that. JUDGE TINLEY: Center Point, three? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. 1-26-09 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 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Dam repair, four. JUDGE TINLEY: Four. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Off-systems, five. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Off-systems, five. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That gives me goosebumps. I really like that. (Laughter.) JUDGE TINLEY: Just feels good, does it? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Feels good. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Speaking of TexDOT. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, lookie here. MR. TUCKER: Just making sure Buster is representing me well. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've got the goosebumps going, buddy. MR. TUCKER: That's right. JUDGE TINLEY: At least we have somebody to carry the message to TexDOT that speaks their language. MR. TUCKER: I'm here. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we approve the list as we just sorted it out. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as 1-26-09 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 indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. For your -- for your information, Commissioners, what I am going to try and do is get my go-to gal, special projects gal, Ms. Lavender, and enlist her aid in trying to get the paperwork together to get this stuff stacked on this basis. Because there's some paperwork involved, and it's going to have to go forward to the Congressman's office, and probably Mr. Overby -- Guy Overby, as y'all know, has been working hard on these things too, so I'm not sure what input he'll have, but we're going to get it -- try and get it cranked up. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 6, which was a 10 o'clock item. We're a bit past that now. Consider, discuss, take appropriate action to release the Letter of Credit Number 8014 for the road in Lasso Ranch Subdivision and accept the road for maintenance. Mr. Odom? MR. ODOM: Good morning, Judge. The road in Lasso Ranch Subdivision has been completed, inspected, and approved. The original plan was for the road to be privately maintained, but the developer decided to have the road be 1-26-09 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 maintained by Kerr County. There's one cattle guard on the property that would be taken out at the next maintenance of the road. At this time, we ask the Court to release the Lasso Ranch Subdivision Letter of Credit Number 8014 for 72,000, and accept the road for maintenance by Kerr County contingent on $908.93 the developer owes for Wayne Wells' engineering reviews. As of Friday about 3 o'clock, Mr. -- your neighbor? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Crenwelge. MR. ODOM: Crenwelge. Dale came in, and that is paid off, so there's no need for contingency, and as far as ~I ~ I'm concerned, we're ready for maintenance for that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept the road -- is ', it road or is it roads? Road, isn't it? In Lasso Ranch. MR. ODOM: Just one road, right. ', COMMISSIONER LETZ: Into the Kerr County road system. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that to include releasing the letter of credit? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Question or -- or comments on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 1-26-09 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 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The Ranches at Sunset Ridge have a Letter of Credit Number 221 for $313,735 that expired on March 26th of '09. Wayne Wells did a maintenance inspection on January the 14th of this year. Wayne noted that the brooming of the pavement would need to be done prior to acceptance, that the right-of-way would need an adequate stand of grass, and that signs would be in good condition. We're asking the Court to either reduce the Ranches at Sunset Ridge's letter of credit to 30 percent of the 313,735 amount, or request that the Crockett National Bank issue a maintenance bond for the same reduced amount. The new amount would be for $94,120.50. We also -- at this time, we ask to have their timeframe extended one year so they would be able to get the grass to grow in the right-of-way. We feel at this time, with the drought and time of year, it would be difficult to get the grass to take hold. We ask for your guidance in this issue to either reduce the letter of credit or have them issue a maintenance bond for 30 percent, which 1-26-09 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 would be 94,120.50, and extend the period for one year. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom, banks normally aren't in the bonding business. A letter of credit is a pretty liquid capital item; it's easy to call upon. MR. ODOM: That's true. JUDGE TINLEY: It occurs to me if the amount's going to be the same, we ought to stay with the letter of credit. You're comfortable working with those? MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Banks honor them readily, as opposed to getting them or somebody else in the bonding business. I'd prefer not to deal with bonding companies. They like to duck and dodge a lot. MR. ODOM: That's true. And if I have the letter of credit and we don't get it completed, I can get it done. I can file on that. I would -- ~I JUDGE TINLEY: For 94. MR. ODOM: For the 94. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. ', COMMISSIONER LETZ: Would the time period be extended to one year from now, or when the new one's issued, or would it expire March 26th? MR. ODOM: March the 26th, and go for one year from there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: One year from that date. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 61 MR. ODOM: Right, sir. And it may be the summer, but I hate to say six months and then have to come back to you again. I think it's appropriate. If they had a maintenance bond, it would be one year. Maintenance bond wouldn't give it for six months or three months; they would make them go out one year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- the letter of credit has a different purpose than a maintenance bond, it seems to me. When we're accepting the road, we're doing the one-year maintenance bond for -- to make sure the road stands up. I guess you could use a letter of credit to do the same thing if the road falls apart. Maybe we need to look at our Subdivision Rules on that, to just require a letter of credit instead of a maintenance bond, if we prefer to deal with them. JUDGE TINLEY: I think what we're dealing with now is just getting the project finished -- MR. ODOM: Finished. JUDGE TINLEY: -- before we accept the road for maintenance, and at that point is when you look at a maintenance bond there for a period of one year. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: Post completion and acceptance. MR. ODOM: Right. And what they did before was use their performance bond for two years. 1-26-09 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 62 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. MR. ODOM: So we never did go back into the maintenance bond; we just kept it all the way through. Now you're telling me that is completed as performance bonds, and I'm sorry, I don't recall. It does say a maintenance bond, but we have used, I mean, letter of credits in the past. So -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have. COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right. I'll move that we authorize Road and Bridge to get with the developer to get a new letter of credit in the amount of $94,120.50, to last for one year, or up to one year from -- MR. ODOM: March 26th. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- March 26, 2009. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: And as it related to Sunset Ridges -- roads in Sunset Ridges Subdivision. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, that's the agenda item. Further question or comment? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) 1-26-09 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 63 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to Item 8; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to go out for annual bids for road base, cold mix, aggregate, emulsion oil, and corrugated metal pipe. Mr. Odom? MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. We're asking that authority from y'all for the road base, cold mix, and aggregate and emulsion and corrugated pipe. Once we put out the bids, we will come back to the Court to open the bids on March the 9th, 2009, at 10 a.m. in Commissioners Court, and follow up with awarding the bids on March 23rd, 2009, at 10 o'clock. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. 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: Let's be in recess for about 15 minutes, and then we'll take up Item 9. (Recess taken from 10:15 a.m. to 10:35 a.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: Let's come back to order, if we might. We were in a short recess. We'll now go to Item 9, 1-26-09 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 which is to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to adopt a resolution opposing the wastewater discharge at Hill Country Camp on Harper Road. Commissioner Baldwin, you asked that this item be placed on the agenda. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I did, sir, and I thank you for the recognition. This resolution, we had talked about it, and talked about this issue many times in here and out in the community, and I saw where the City of Kerrville weighed in on the issue, and U.G.R. -- Upper Guadalupe River with some of my constituents recently, and they suggested that the County also weigh in on the issue. Now, the -- the church camp out there, I understand, has applied to the state for a wastewater treatment plant, and that treatment plant does certain things. And the application -- you know, a certain amount of water to be discharged, et cetera, and I am not an expert in the field of wastewater treatment plants or wastewater, so I have to leave that to the experts. And I happen to know that in my years of working with the State of Texas, T.C.E.Q. are much more liberal than I am about these issues. So I'm thinking, you know, if they take a look at this -- at this treatment facility, and they think that it's a workable deal -- and, you know, I can't argue with them. They're -- they're supposedly experts, and there are some experts in this room that I think that want to 1-26-09 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 65 But my point here in this -- in this resolution is encouraging the camp to look at alternative systems. And when I think about that, I think about what goes on in my own yard, and that is my sewage is treated underground, and then sprinklers pop up and spray my yard. How -- it doesn't get much more simple than that, other than I wish I could get my colleagues to pay for it. (Laughter.) But that -- that's my recommendation for the Hill Country Camp to do, is to reuse the wastewater that they produce. Treat it, spray it back on their own property. Now, the bottom line here for me, personally, is -- and I've said this to their attorney, Mr. Shoemaker, who's here from Austin, and the camp manager, et cetera -- is that if you want to be good neighbors and you want to get along with your neighbors, then you need to take a look at what you're proposing. You need to rethink that, and you need to consider an alternative system, such as reusing it and spraying it back on your own property. Now, if -- that's my desire. I want -- I want the Hill Country Camp to get along with all those neighbors that are up and 1-26-09 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 66 neighbors are not going to get along with you if you do that. So, Judge, if you'd allow me, I'd like to read the resolution into the record. JUDGE TINLEY: Surely. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then I'm going to make a 1319 Harper Road in Kerr County, Texas, is owned and operated by the Assemblies of God Church; and whereas the Hill Country Camp has filed an application with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, T.C.E.Q., for a Texas Pollutant Discharge System, Permit Number WQ-0014832001, to discharge treated wastewater from a treatment plant located on their property that will ultimately reach the Guadalupe River through constant flows from Town Creek; and whereas a public meeting was conducted by T.C.E.Q. on May 29th, 2008, in the Kerr County District Courtroom Number 1, at which area citizens expressed their concerns for the potential adverse impact the proposed discharge may cause to the Guadalupe River; and whereas the Upper Guadalupe River Authority likewise expressed its concern that the proposed discharge could adversely impact water quality in an impaired area of 1-26-09 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 67 the Guadalupe River; and whereas there exists today several viable treatment alternatives that should be carefully examined and considered by the Hill Country Camp ownership before proceeding with the current wastewater discharge plans. Now, therefore, be it resolved, the Kerr County Commissioners Court strongly urges Hill Country Camp ownership to examine alternative wastewater treatment options, including surface or subsurface application of discharge from an approved treatment plant which can be accomplished through spraying a large portion of treated effluent onto their property; and be it resolved that copies of this resolution be forwarded to ownership of Hill Country Camp, the T.C.E.Q., U.G.R.A., and other interested parties. Adopted today, the 26th day of January, 2009. And I offer that as a motion to adopt this resolution. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Third. JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second for adoption of the resolution. Let me note that we have a number of participation forms on this particular matter. I want to be certain that everybody gets a reasonable opportunity to be heard. What I would ask is that you try and be brief and succinct in your comments. If -- I would ask that you not be extremely repetitive of other speakers, 1-26-09 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 but I do want everybody that truly wants an opportunity to be heard to have that opportunity. So, I am going to call for the speakers who have asked to be heard. The first one is That's MS. BARBER: Yes, sir, McCullough Ranch Road. JUDGE TINLEY: McCullough Ranch Road. MS. BARBER: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Which is immediately off of Harper MS. BARBER: Well, my property is directly across opposed the plant just because of the proximity to my property. And then when I learned that they were going to be dumping the effluent into the tributary, then I was equally opposed to it. So, I -- my experience with knowing about sewage plants has been limited to my aerobic septic system in my back yard, so I've done a lot of homework on this. I would encourage you to, if you have Google time, to look up sewage leaks, in Texas only. And I got 31,500 hits. Now those are not all accurate, but what you start doing is you start seeing municipal water spills. And to me, a municipal district is much better prepared and organized than a camp might be. I'm not saying that they are, but if it's a municipal and they still have leaks and spills, then this 1-26-09 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 69 concerns me. So, with the proximity of my property, I started doing homework. I visited the Bastrop site, which is an area that's comparable to what the Hill Country Camp is hoping to do. They have an MBR plant, which is a membrane plant. I didn't know these words about three weeks ago. But the plant that is there is state of the art. It's about the size of this room, and it's two-story. They take their water and they pump that back up into a water garden that they have so kids can go and benefit from the water lilies and all these sorts of things. So, to me, that's the ideal thing that we would want with our neighbors being good neighbors to us. So, as opposed to dumping their water, as opposed to putting that sewage plant right next to my property, wouldn't it be a good thing if they would reconsider locating it on the center of their property, where they will maintain it and they will know immediately if they have a spill. It'll impact them, and if it's going to be in your back yard and it's going to be yours, aren't you going to watch it better? So, that's -- that's my -- that's my two cents. So, I -- I appreciate you considering it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. The next MR. SKOKNA: Very good. Thank you. 1-26-09 ~o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: And he lives at 2041 Crown Ridge MR. SKOKNA: Thank you. I've come here today to support the motion that Commissioner Baldwin just read, and for three different reasons. One is the -- in my opinion, the discharge has toxic characteristics to certain types of aquatic life. Those characteristics will dissipate with dilution and time, but will cause a problem, I think, wherever it first enters the Town Creek. Second of all, if I experience at petrochemical plants, a lot of the time devoted to complying with environmental regulations. And rather than going through all the details, I will just tell you one little story, and this comes with an apology to any counsel who may be present. The plant I was at, we received our permit and had several months of reasonably good compliance, and some problems, and we had some word from the state that we were operating in that we needed to do better. And, as a result of that, we assembled a team which involved -- part of the team involved several lawyers. And we had a meeting and explained the situation, and we said to the lawyers, "What do you think?" And the lead attorney said, "Well, you just sent my children through Harvard Law School." So, I think the point is clear on that. 1-26-09 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 25 And then the third is -- is that I think the intent here, which comes from the EPA Gold Book, which is EPA's guidelines for the limits of what you should have for the conditions that I think will exist in the first lake on -- that receives that water, they say the limit should be somewhere around .5 to 1. So, we're looking at allowing a discharge that is six times above what EPA recommends. If you look at some of the literature -- what I'm citing is for bluegills, from J.T. Baker -- they say that the limits should be .02. So, we're looking at significantly higher levels than what the research data shows is toxic to fish. Bluegills are, of course, an important species. My opinion is -- is that if you look at the situation, Town Creek doesn't have much flow in it, especially this past year or so, 16 months. There's no flow in the tributary that the discharge will come through, so what you're going to have, I think, is a pretty big dead zone in that first lake, and I don't know what downstream from that, but it will not be good. Getting back to the camp, I mentioned that they may have some steep legal bills as time 1-26-09 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 goes by, but they'll also have ongoing costs. If you look at the permit requirements for testing, it's probably $100 to $200 a week just to have those tests run, and then there's also special testing fees that might also -- they might also incur. And I guess just the last part is -- is that, you know, I think it's the neighborly thing to do, to consider these alternates. I -- and I guess I said to myself, well, if it was my camp, what would I do? And I'd sure build a hayfield and use that water to make hay instead of pollution. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. The next participation form was filed by Jim Olafson, with an address of 160 Turkey Run. MR. JIM OLAFSON: I'll pass. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Then, at the same address at 160 Turkey Run, we have Bonnie Olafson. MS. OLAFSON: I was really hoping to speak after the lawyer for the camp spoke. JUDGE TINLEY: I think everybody wants to take a shot at you. Well, I don't want to disappoint them, Mr. Shoemaker. MR. SHOEMAKER: I don't mind going ahead if you'd like. JUDGE TINLEY: Scott Shoemaker from Austin, Texas, with the Terrill firm is here with us, and it's my 1-26-09 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 73 understanding he represents the Hill Country Camp in this MR. SHOEMAKER: Yes, sir. I'm Scott Shoemaker, and I am here on behalf of Hill Country Camp. First of all, I just wanted to say thank you very much for your flexibility in giving us the opportunity to come out here and speak about the resolution. I'm already getting the theme here about people being concerned about pollution and things of that nature. And while I'm more than happy to address any side questions that I may get, please understand, I'm not an engineer. I'm just a lawyer, and I'll do the best I can, but I may not be able to answer every question. However, I am going to focus my statement kind of on the resolution itself. And also, since I'm down here, I wanted to also take an opportunity to -- to kind of clear the air on some things. There's been some things said about -- and I know it's not necessarily the Commissioners, but I wanted to -- I thought this was a good audience to kind of clear the air on some things. So, if I may, before I start about the resolution, could I just discuss a couple of items? Okay. Well, thank you. First, I just want to say Hill Country Camp is a growing, thriving camp, and, you know, they have been on a septic system just like just about everybody else in this neighborhood, from what I understand. And, you know, in 1-26-09 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 order to safely and responsibly meet their growth needs, you know, they applied to the T.C.E.Q. to get this discharge permit. It is -- and in our opinion, it is definitely one of the more safe and responsible options to do. And everybody has a differing opinion on what needs to be done about it, but this is definitely a safe and responsible option. As you probably know, the T.C.E.Q., they review all these domestic wastewater applications, and they issue the draft permits only if those applications meet standards designed to be protective of the environment. This facility, Hill Country Camp, would meet or exceed these requirements. Hill Country Camp, among their bills in pursuing this application, they have hired experienced engineers to prepare their application, and the draft permit was prepared by top-notch engineers at T.C.E.Q. And according to those engineers, the experts in this area, the proposed discharge would not be harmful to the environment. Some of the things that have gone out there -- and I think somebody made a really funny reference to it already, about treated effluent. But, you know, it has been said that Hill Country Camp has applied to discharge raw sewage, and that's a complete fabrication. Hill Country Camp, in my opinion, is a good neighbor, and they would never propose to do that, nor would T.C.E.Q. ever permit that. So, I wanted to make it clear about that. Another thing, a lot of people 1-26-09 75 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 specific, but we're not talking about a massive discharge here. This is -- in the grand scheme of things, this is a very low flow discharge. Frankly, that amount's unlikely to even leave Hill Country Camp's property, much less impact or cause flooding to the tributaries like we've seen on the comments . I also see another -- another writing from someone that wants Hill Country Camp to match the City of Kerrville's permits. It's really kind of an apples and oranges kind of deal, okay? There are some real differences between the two, one of which is that Hill Country Camp's proposing 25,000 gallons a day. The City of Kerrville does 4.5 million gallons per day. I mean, this discharge is dwarfed by that. I mean, based on that just simply alone, regardless of the effluent limits between the two permits, we aren't that far apart. I mean, at 4.5 million a day, how ', many -- which one do you think would be actually discharging more pollutants, pounds per day into the water? In my opinion, it would be the 4.5 million gallons a day. 1-26-09 76 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Another thing with regard to the City of Kerrville's permit -- and I believe you all have a copy of the Executive Director's response to comments on this matter. And in that -- and in that document, they said that Kerrville's limits are set to insure their more stringent limits that everybody wants to see Hill Country Camp do. These are set in order to insure that the 4 milligrams a liter of dissolved oxygen is met. Well, there's more than one way to skin a cat. Hill Country Camp's permit is written to do the same thing. When it's not a discharge directly into Guadalupe River, you have an unnamed tributary that's dry most of the year, and then it -- before it would even run into Town Creek or into the Guadalupe River, it's just a different situation, and there's a different way to accomplish the same dissolved oxygen. I'm going to kind of get off the soapbox as far as -- as far as our opinion on the effect on the environment, but just so I'm clear, we think, and T.C.E.Q. also thinks that this proposed discharge is not going to be harmful to the environment by itself. However, I do see this resolution as -- as your viewpoint that you're concerned about the environment, and -- and we definitely respect the fact that you want us to take a look at other options, and that you're concerned about -- really, just concerned about the environment itself. But, as -- as written, we are against 1-26-09 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 77 this resolution, because the proposed discharge would already be protective of the environment. However, I'm getting the of that, if you do decide to pass a resolution, I just want you to know that Hill Country Camp, we do respect your concern, and we will not take it lightly. And, so, I did offer an amended resolution. If I may, let me pass around copies. These were included with the clerk's record. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. MR. SHOEMAKER: And I can just run through it really quick. In the next to last -- in the -- I think in the second paragraph, it says that the discharge "may" impact the Guadalupe instead of "will." Our position, and in addition to the T.C.E.Q.'s position, is that this will not impact negatively the Guadalupe River. So, along that line, I thought a fair compromise would just be to say it may impact, just because it's not a guarantee. In fact, we don't believe it will at all. Also -- just some of the key ones -- at the next-to-last paragraph, I suggest changing "treatment" to "disposal," and "approved" to "permitted," mainly 'cause it's a little bit of a term of art, and also because I think the point here, what you're -- you're suggesting is that where we dispose of the treated effluent, not necessarily how it gets treated. 1-26-09 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 78 Some people may beg to differ, but I think the point of today's resolution was to determine where the effluent would be disposed of. In addition, toward the middle of the resolution, I did add basically some key language from the Executive Director's response to comments. I have a copy of that, if you like -- if you'd like another one. In a nutshell, Commissioner Baldwin, you pointed out that everybody had kind of given you -- given you all their viewpoint on it, and I think that it's important in your resolution to incorporate the Executive Director's weigh-in on it as well. Mainly, I just want to thank you again for giving us the opportunity to make it down here. I appreciate it, and I'm more than happy to answer all questions if I -- if I'm capable of doing so. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. MR. SHOEMAKER: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Let me come back to Mr. Jim Olafson. Now that the representative from Hill Country Camp has spoken, do you wish to exercise your right to speak, Mr. Olafson? MR. JIM OLAFSON: The only problem I have is, if this 25,000 gallons that won't affect anything -- they have a tank on their place. Why don't they just dump it their own place if it doesn't affect anybody and it won't even get to my lake? That's all. Just, if they want to be neighborly, 1-26-09 79 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 just dump it in their own little tank. Keep it. They say 25,000 gallons is a water hose; won't even get down the tributary. Fine. Keep on it their place. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Ms. Bonnie Olafson, also from 160 Turkey Run. MS. OLAFSON: Yes. I'm a property -- our property is the first in line to receive the effluent from the camp. He quoted the T.C.E.Q. study, and I have to say, I was really disappointed in what a shallow investigation the T.C.E.Q. did. They worked from the old aerial paragraph, estimated the depth of the water. It was just guesswork. The photograph they worked from did not show my son's house, which is 123 feet from their proposed discharge route. It's also within 200 feet of their well, and they're going to be running this stuff right next to their dwelling. Most of the year, most years, the -- we trap the water in our lake, and during the hot months of the year, four to six months, it doesn't go anywhere; it just sits there. And right now, we're at 10 months where it hasn't flowed, and we're still a foot and a half, 2 feet from the top of the dam. Now, when that stuff sits there stewing in the summer sun and the water evaporates, what do you think the bacterial and chemical concentrations will become? We won't have a fish left in that lake. Plus when it does start to flow, it will be a much nastier stew than what the T.C.E.Q. has estimated. 1-26-09 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 Now, with this protest, I have written and told them the parameters. Oh, the model they used said that the water wouldn't flow for one week a year. Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. If they had talked to anybody from around there -- I've lived on that property 28 years, and I know what the flow is. And they made no attempt to talk to anybody, to look at anything. They just worked from an aerial photograph, and I don't think they did a very thorough job. And I hope, with the new information they got from our letters, that they will come up with the correct numbers this time around. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Olafson. MS. OLAFSON: Oh, could I ask for a show of hands of those here who are against the camp dumping their effluent? (Many audience members raised their hand.) AUDIENCE: Will the lawyer please turn around and see these hands? JUDGE TINLEY: Point made, I think, Ms. Olafson. Tommy Olafson, 1306 -- MR. TOMMY OLAFSON: 1308. JUDGE TINLEY: 1308? MR. TOMMY OLAFSON: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Harper. MR. TOMMY OLAFSON: Yes, sir. As my mom just said, 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 81 my house is about 200 feet from the proposed discharge route. saying I'm opposed to the approval of Hill Country Camp's. permit. I'm not saying I'm opposed to them building a plant. I'm opposed to the direct discharge they're planning on initially there was only, like, 15 letters put out by the T.C.E.Q. letting people know of the camp's plans. Since then eco-friendly alternatives to the -- to direct discharge available to Hill Country Camp. They have 128 acres, according to their application, which I think is more than enough acreage to do some more eco-friendly alternatives, via underground lateral, they can make their own field, I mean, irrigate with it. There's a bunch of alternatives. Now, I understand alternatives may cost a little bit more. I mean, what they're looking at, in my opinion, is the cheapest and easiest route, which I can't blame them, I mean. But, obviously, they've said the -- they've spent $3 million on improvements. They have plans for a $6 million lodge. Obviously, they have the money. You know, I don't know, you 1-26-09 82 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 know, if it costs a little bit more, but how can you put a price on doing the right thing, is what my main concern is. To some of the things their lawyer said earlier that I don't agree with, they say it's such a low amount of water coming, maybe 1 inch -- a 1-inch garden hose running 24 hours. If you ever let your garden hose run for 24 hours in your yard, it eventually gets saturated, and it's going to run; I don't care. May take a week, may take a month, may take a year, but it's going to be flowing onto our property sometime, and that's private property. And that's -- they don't have our permission. This is America. I think you need permission if you're going to dump something on your neighbor. There -- he made the comment that it's only 25,000 gallons. That's right now. He commented they are a growing camp. Someday, five years, ten years -- I mean, the home I built is around an estate. That's it; that's the one house. I'll be there till I die. That may take 50 years. So, their 25,000 gallons now may be 750,000 gallons someday. I don't know. It's going to be a lot of water coming onto me, and I don't want it. That's the main thing. They say it's -- where they've proposed to put the plant I have an objection to, because if something goes wrong, it's not going to -- you know, their -- it's right on the corner of their property, so if they have a broken pipe, malfunction, power outage, I don't care -- I don't care what 1-26-09 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 you got. I mean, your brand new truck will be in the shop someday. So, sometime they're going to have a problem, and I'm going to be the one that has to deal with it, and that's not right. If they put it on their property, way back in the back 128 acres, they can locate it where if it -- if something goes wrong, they can contain it. Where they are right now, if something goes wrong, it's only, maybe, I don't know, 800 feet from Town Creek, so then that's going to affect everybody. So, they need to move it. It might cost them a little bit more, like I said, but it's the right thing to do. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Mr. Olafson. The next participation form was filed by Pia -- MR. TOMMY OLAFSON: That's my wife. She's unable to attend. She had to step out. JUDGE TINLEY: The next one, Mr. Jim Haynie, 136 Aermotor, Mountain Home, Texas. MR. HAYNIE: Thank you, gentlemen. I'm Jim Haynie from Mountain Home. Most of y'all know me as a water well contractor. I primarily deal with fresh water rather than wastewater, home water systems. Been here, licensed in the state of Texas. I would urge you to pass this resolution, because I feel it's not in the best interests of the citizens of Kerr County the way it's currently written and proposed. The background most of y'all have already heard, so I won't 1-26-09 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 84 go into the background, but the issue to me is that, yes, this permit has been properly filed. The lawyers have made properly filed, but to me, it's an issue of will they be able to comply with this permit over the long time? If that -- the way I understand it, the requirements for wastewater are virtually the same as the city, but the city has a staff that operates this plant at its highest efficiency, and they're always prepared and ready to do whatever it takes to make sure that the city does a good job. And I didn't see that in the comments and the input from Hill Country Camp, so that there is a great possibility of discharge that we really don't want. My recommendation is that the water be treated in their own site, treated to a high degree and then sprinkled. And he's pointed out that's only a 1-inch garden hose. Well, with all the landscaping they have, a 1-inch garden hose is pretty easy to use around that place. And so that's my recommendation, that you approve this resolution, and hopefully someone at T.C.E.Q. and Hill Country Camp will see that -- that we think it's not in the best interests and that there are better ways for them to use their treated effluent. Thank you. 1-26-09 85 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: I thank you, Mr. Haynie. The next was filed -- next participation form was filed by William R. Rector, address at 705 Water Street, Kerrville. DR. RECTOR: Thank you, Honorable Judge, Honorable Commissioners. I'm here also representing Dr. Pruneda. We drew straws to find out who would come over. One of us had to stay at the hospital, so I think I lost. So, we are here today, Dr. Pruneda and myself, to support your resolution. We think that it is the right thing to do, and we appreciate you doing it. Unfortunately, the T.C.E.Q. can't make that recommendation. All they can do is act upon the application that was filed, so I think it is very appropriate for you gentlemen to weigh in on alternative means of handling this discharge. And I would like to say that I -- I feel like that the camp can take a liability from their neighbors and make it an asset for themselves. If they use this discharge to sprinkle on their own property, they can have beautiful soccer fields, they can have beautiful baseball fields, they can have beautiful shrubbery and beautiful flowers on that camp and make it a beautiful garden spot. Water is valuable in the hill country, and to send it downstream is not utilizing that water very efficiently. And I would like to thank you for your motion, and encourage to you pass it. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Is there anyone 1-26-09 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 else who did not file a participation form that wishes to be heard on this issue? I want to give you the opportunity. Anyone else? Yes, ma'am, if you'll come forward, give us your name and address and your input on this subject, please. MS. McMILLEN: I'm Marie McMillen, 1621 Indian extreme drought, and even despite that, I think 25,000 gallons per day is a heck of a lot of water, which about water. I think that's a problem throughout this country, throughout the world. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else? Mr. Shoemaker? MR. SHOEMAKER: If I may just offer a very brief reply? Okay. I just wanted to point out a couple of things. One, Hill Country Camp is -- you know, we submitted our application for this in June 2007. To say it lightly, we're -- we're already deeply invested in where we're at so far. However, in addition to that, you know, obtaining a permit is not necessarily the last thing. So, in a nutshell, I wanted to give everybody a chance to kind of voice their concerns, but at the same time, I just wanted you to know that -- that it's just not cost-effective to just completely hit the 1-26-09 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 restart button. So I think, in all fairness, I'm asking you to at least keep in mind in your resolution to maybe leave -- leave flexibility to options post permit issuance, because there -- there are options out there. But, you know, our hands are tied with some of them; I can't say exactly which ones would be possible to do. Just depending on the cost and the technology behind it. But, you know, getting the permit is not necessarily the end of the road. Thanks. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. MS. BARBER: Could I say something since -- on the back of what he said? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I thought it appropriate to allow him -- you know, there were some that wanted to speak after him, only after he spoke, and I don't want to start round two and then round three. MS. BARBER: I won't. JUDGE TINLEY: That's a promise? MS. BARBER: Yes. Just basically, I've been involved in a lot of nonprofit issues, and when you go before your community and you're going to build something, you seek input prior to putting something on the plan. You bring your community in and you say, look, we want to be a good neighbor, and here's what we're thinking about doing. Could you get along with us and all that. And that's what we have not had at all. 1-26-09 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 JUDGE TINLEY: Let's get your name and address on I the record. MS. BARBER: Wendy Barber, 119 McCullough Ranch Road. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. Okay, that's going to close it up. Any member of the Court have anything to offer in addition to what we've heard here today with regard to the motion that's before the Court? COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the only comment I'd like is -- you know, I intend to vote for the resolution, but I also think it's very likely that the facility's going to go in as permitted, and I hope everyone -- hope that they -- their attorney would -- Mr. Shoemaker was, you know, accurate in saying that they'll continue to work with the community. What I heard him say at the very end -- I'm not sure everybody heard the same thing -- was that -- that if the permit gets approved, there are still things that they can do, and hopefully will do, to meet some of the concerns. And, you know, we have no control over the permit; all we can do is pass a resolution. But if this thing does proceed, I hope that y'all can get together and work things out. That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other comments? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I just want to make one other comment. As you can see, Mr. Shoemaker, the stand 1-26-09 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 that the community takes, like Mr. Letz just said, we -- we certainly don't tell T.C.E.Q. what to do, and more importantly, I don't tell these people what to do. They tell me what to do. And I have been on the wrong side of the fence with a couple of these folks, and life is unpleasant at times. (Laughter.) My whole thing here, once again, is if that camp wants to be good neighbors, you better try to get along with these folks. If you don't, or if you're not interested in being a good neighbor to these people, then you continue with what you're doing. I can tell you that, and that's all -- that's all I'm saying. And I'd like to -- our resolution to stand as written, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, your motion speaks for the resolution that you've offered, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It sounds like, from listening to members of the public -- I guess I'm really addressing this comment to counsel for the camp. It does sound like there are other issues other than just the discharge into a tributary that reaches Town Creek, which ultimately reaches the Guadalupe River. And I think in your ',I efforts to be the good neighbor that you say you would like to be, and I have no reason to believe that you won't be, I think you ought to examine those issues. Most notably in my mind was the placement of the treatment plant in terms of proximity on your property and proximity to other property 1-26-09 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 90 owners. That's an issue. I can really relate to the individual who talked about that. If I had property out there, I would be most upset if, all of a sudden, I see you build a -- a wastewater treatment plant within the setback limits as posted by Kerr County on my property line. That would really bug me. And so I think you need to examine all of the issues that the folks here today have talked to you about. I urge you to do that. JUDGE TINLEY: I -- I was concerned about the cows got out, but Ms. Olafson's concern that they didn't make inquiry of the neighbors to find out the configuration of these water containments. I don't know what they knew about the depths, or whether they just ballparked or took a shot in the dark at it. Anybody that's been up and down that road of late, I think it's readily apparent that, really, that lake, or a good portion of it, is really quite shallow. And I'm concerned about the lack of factual gathering that -- that has apparently occurred in connection with the research done to look at the dilution or non-dilution of -- of these components that are going to end up in this containment. Another gentleman brought us some figures. The ammonia figures are quite disturbing. That is anywhere from 6 to 12 times in excess. And if bluegills are at .2, good gosh, that would be really off the chart, wouldn't it? About 30 times 1-26-09 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 But, as all of you know, my wife's the fisherman in the bunch, but I still know what -- what a bluegill is. That's a common perch, a brim, and that's probably the most common fish we've got around, and if we start killing those off, then the chain just starts collapsing from there. But I'm concerned about some of the -- of the factual aspects that apparently weren't brought into play. And I don't know how many more of these scientific components are out there that are akin to the ammonia, but that's quite disturbing, and it concerns me for the residents of the area, and particularly the immediate downstream owners that are going to necessarily be containing that discharge unless and until it goes over -- freeboards and goes over the top of that dam. And there can be a lot that occurs between those two time periods. Even if we got a decent rain, it may take a while to -- to start going over that dam again. But those are my concerns, and for whatever it's worth. Any -- any other comments? Commissioner? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I just -- the good That lady that owned the cat was very concerned with her neighbors' safety, and then feeling a little better about her 1-26-09 92 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 cat being able to return, so she agreed to do some excessive things in order to exceed the limit, you know, what the state requires, to try to get along with her neighbors. And that is an issue. And I believe when you're talking about water running downstream and you run it into a lake that's a -- basically a -- nothing more than an impound when you do not have any flow, I'd be concerned too. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I would want somebody to take neighbor. And it's just -- it's the right thing to do; I agree with those statements, and also the technical stuff plays into it as well. That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: We have before us the motion that 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 us now go to Agenda Item 16; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to approve an agreement between Kerr County and Groves and Associates for project management services for Center Point/Eastern Kerr County wastewater project. Commissioner 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 93 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Judge. This is underway, and it is a proposed agreement for project management services for -- for the wastewater project. The Court recalls that our obligation under the grant agreement with T.W.D.B. is for $59,500, 25 percent of the project cost. And of that amount, we are obligated for at least $29,750 in cash for services that need to be rendered for this project, and 29,750 for in-kind services. I don't want to bore the Court with what this is all about, but I'll give you a little sense of what a project manager is going to be required to do. And these are things that I can't do, or I don't think Commissioner Letz can do, unless he's been to engineering school since the last time I talked to him. But just a little sense of it is, under -- under category -- Planning Category B, existing facilities and problems, documentation of public consent for construction, including any and all -- whatever's required by the County, T.W.D.B., T.C.E.Q. regulations, interested parties. Work with the County in the planning and executing of public meetings, including providing all documentation and presentation materials for these meetings, and work with us in the composing of advertisements and placing them at the proper time and working with us in terms of recorded public 1-26-09 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 consent. Under the Category C, alternatives and designs, overall assistance with identification and evaluation of all current requirements and the ability to provide service, collaboration and review and engineering evaluations of all alternatives developed, including both development and Under Planning Category D, work out with the engineers who are doing the grunt work total project budget, including all relevant design acquisition and construction costs, and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. The cost of the contract for project management is $29,750. We encumbered, if you recall, from our 2008 budget -- we actually encumbered an amount a little bit greater than that. Our in-kind service, I've worked out with our County Auditor how we would proceed to record our end of the in-kind bargain, which also has to total at least $29,750, and that would involve this Commissioner, and any time that Commissioner Letz puts in on the project, our time, and any costs for travel and expenses associated with the project; time of the County Judge in public meetings, anything that's involved with the Court being involved in the 1-26-09 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 project; our administrative assistant coordinating meetings, agendas, and doing public notices and advertisements, again, Health study, providing materials, and necessary time and testing; and County Attorney preparing necessary resolutions, reviewing all our legal documents, including hookup policy and Subdivision Rules, some of which has already taken place, and we'll take credit for that time as well; Auditor's office in terms of providing accounting records, preparing pay invoices, and tracking -- generally tracking the project, and attending meetings where required, time and expenses; our court reporter, time and expenses for preparing -- attending meetings and preparing minutes, so that we know exactly who said what, when and where. And we will keep timesheets accurately of any and all of these and any other expenses that we may incur as part of our in-kind. So, the -- the proposal is in front of you for Mr. Al Groves, who no longer is with Tetra Tech. He was with Tetra Tech when the RFP went out, and was part of the -- the whole plan from the very beginning. He now acts as a consultant, and will work with that agency who is doing the basic engineer service work. His service -- his contract would be for 29,750. Our in-kind has to total that much as well. Commissioner Letz, want to add anything? 1-26-09 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 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I think you pretty much covered it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Williams, I'm curious about one thing. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The in-kind side of it, you and Commissioner Letz, what do y'all charge? Like, $3 or $4 a day? Or, I mean -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: About three, four hundred an hour. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Three or four hundred an hour? (Laughter.) JUDGE TINLEY: Sounds like lawyers, doesn't it, Buster? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Golly, you guys -- y'all think a little more of yourselves than I do. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know, but we'll work with the Auditor to come up with what our hourly rate would be. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Three or four dollars a day would do it. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hourly rate's going to be pretty easily determined. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, it will. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, thank you. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 97 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good round number, though. I would move approval of the project management services agreement with Groves and Associates for Center Point/East Kerr County wastewater project. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval. Question or discussion? Mr. Groves has -- he's been -- irrespective of who he's with, he's been the lead guy on this thing from the get-go. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Very, very much. JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Jump to 18 first? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, we'll go to Item 18; to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to receive update from the Kerr County Tax Assessor and/or Kerr Central Appraisal District concerning problems with tax statements and/or notices and how to prevent problems from happening again. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, may I make a suggestion? Why don't you call 17 and I8 at the same time? 1-26-09 98 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anybody on the Court have any problem with that? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's fine. JUDGE TINLEY: Let me also call Item 17; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to allow County Attorney and County Auditor to pursue recommendation involving Tyler Technology. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, before we get started on this, I'm going to probably have to step out before we're done with this. I need to leave. My -- you don't care. Anyway, I've got to pick up kids at school. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's not buying lunch, is what he's saying. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's exactly what he's saying. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But the -- I put these both on the agenda, but I think everyone on the Court is a little bit aware of them. I know the Tax Assessor is. I'm glad, Fourth, you got notice of this. And I asked you -- put you -- included you primarily because of things I heard from the public was that part of the problem was y'all's responsibility. And I don't know if that's true or not, but I think, certainly, if it is or not, that needs to be aired as well. But, to me, this is a -- a huge problem, and a really bad problem that needs to be -- find out how big it 1-26-09 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 is, which I'm not sure we know that, and I don't believe -- I'm not real comfortable looking at Tyler Technologies to tell us. They created the problem -- part of the problem, anyway, so I've been told. But we really need to get to the bottom of that, and if Tyler Technologies is at fault on some of this, this just goes onto the rest of the problems that I keep on hearing about Tyler Technologies, and that's -- I think that really needs to be looked into. We spent a lot of money on this software, and I can't believe it's all operator error. That's just kind of my opening comments. I'll turn it over to Diane. MS. BOLIN: Thank you. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Fourth. MS. BOLIN: Update on the tax statements. The report that showed 483 was a wrong report. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is right? MS. BOLIN: The young lady that did it, I asked her to give me a list of properties with value -- taxable value and zero levy. There were only ten properties on that list. You and Donald were part of them. Jonathan was on the list. So, it's like -- okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I didn't know I was on there. MS. BOLIN: So -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Two good reasons to get it straightened out. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 100 MS. BOLIN: Very good. And I'm glad that they were involved, so -- up to a point. I don't want anybody involved and not get a tax statement. But, I got the ten corrected last week. I've got the statements ready to mail. The supplement issue we're having is also a calculation issue. The information that I get from the Appraisal District, there are several stages that I go through where I make sure everything still balances. They always balance on the import, and then after the import is where it starts falling apart, when it's actually being put into the system. So, that part, I don't know what to do. At this point, I have no confidence in the system. Personally, I don't like giving the information to the taxpayers, because I can't be sure it's correct, and then when it's not correct, then it's me, or they're after the Appraisal District. We're doing the best we can with the products we have. Her -- Sharon's system, their software company is fully aware of the problems that we're having and are working on it. Tyler just says it's their -- their software's problem, and they calculate wrong, so I don't know where to go from here. So I'm just -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What does Tyler say again? Tell me what Tyler says again? MS. BOLIN: They said -- they have told me more than once that True Automation, who is the company that the Appraisal District has, does not calculate the freezes and 1-26-09 101 1 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 exemptions and the prorations correctly. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MS. BOLIN: But they do, so it's a True Automation problem. But when it comes over, it should give me some kind of report to say, okay, these are what's not -- these are what the problems are so that I can go fix them. It does to a point, but it doesn't give me all of them. And short of me going property by property by property, and some of these that have over 1,000 properties, and looking at what the Appraisal District sent and what our system accepted, I don't know what to do. I know Ms. Hargis wants to do an audit going back for the last three years since we've had the system. I don't know what she'll be able to find out. I don't know how she'll go about doing it. Tyler, at this point -- I got two phone calls on Friday from other tax collectors stating that Tyler is telling them that it is a user problem, and I'm up to here with user problems. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask -- MS. BOLIN: If I can't follow their directions and get it done, then -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask you one more question, please. MS. BOLIN: Certainly. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, our -- our program, the County's program, Tyler says the problem is the Appraisal 1-26-09 102 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 District's -- MS. BOLIN: Software. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- software? MS. BOLIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that true? MS. BOLIN: I don't think so. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You receive the information from the Appraisal District? MS. BOLIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And it's accurate numbers and accurate -- MS. BOLIN: From what I can tell, yeah. We do have errors off and on, but not a substantial amount. And all I do is call Sharon and say, "Hey, this doesn't compute. What's the deal?" And she checks it out and gives me the correct information for us to get it right. But when -- when I do the initial import of the information from the Appraisal District, their totals balance with what it shows that we brought in. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MS. BOLIN: And then from there, it starts to break I down . COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Does Tyler ever say, "My goodness, we may be making a mistake here; we may have a little problem of some sort." Do they? 1-26-09 103 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 MS. BOLIN: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: They never say anything like that? They always point to the gentleman from Medina? MS. BOLIN: They point to the gentleman from Medina and the young lady from out in Mountain Home and blame it on them, as well as user error. It's consistently "user error." JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Bolin, have -- have you sought the assistance from our I.T. Manager to confirm the validity or not of all this? MS. BOLIN: John's fully aware of the problems, and he has been -- Dusty Womble talked to him on Thursday. He told me he was the vice president; John says he's the president. I don't know who he is, but he talked to John on Thursday. John has been on the phone several times in the last couple of weeks trying to get some kind of assistance in getting this done, and we're just going nowhere from what I can see. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Letz, how could you leave at a time like this? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's tough. It's tough. (Commissioner Letz left the courtroom.) MS. BOLIN: Yeah. MR. TROLINGER: Well, initially, a couple weeks -- three weeks back, I asked for on-site training that we would pay for, and I was looking to the Auditor actually to drum up 1-26-09 104 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 the money necessary out of budget to get on-site support, I thought it was such a severe problem. But as a result of all the coverage of the incorrect list, the massive problem that's -- 10 properties affected now, we're going to receive free on-site training, and hopefully work out all of Diane's issues where she's getting conflicts, where the support person at the other end of the phone right now is saying, "Well, do this," and when Diane does that, it doesn't work. And we need to sit down with support at the same table, with problems, and that's the purpose of the on-site. That is the resolution to the issue, the solution. JUDGE TINLEY: What you say is the first MR. TROLINGER: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Hopefully, that will be all that's necessary, is additional -- by getting the person down here, doing the on-site and going through all of these difficulties and getting them worked out. MR. TROLINGER: Yes. And it is a complex system. There are lots of complicated things that Central Appraisal has to do. There are lots of pieces in the law, and I understand this data's very complicated. One thing that Kerr County -- we can do, and I made mention of this during the last budget cycle with Diane and a couple of the other 1-26-09 105 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 elected officials that handle a lot of data, is -- is that we properties, a certain amount of data in the court system, the Sheriff, the County Attorney, they need reports run that are custom that the support just can't do, so eventually we'll need in-house database analysis and support, and that's The data is what we're COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Has this problem happened in the years past, the last -- the previous two years? MS. BOLIN: Not that I'm aware of. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Wonder what happened this year that it's so different than the process in years past. MS. BOLIN: This is the first year that Tyler has loaded our levy. Whether it had something to do with what they did regarding this House Bill 1010 that affected overlapping properties, I don't have a clue. JUDGE TINLEY: You had some input? MR. EMERSON: I just really had a question. I guess this is for the Appraisal District, and it's a question of -- has y'all's -- JUDGE TINLEY: We're going to get to their input here in just a minute. They're another leg to the stool. If 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 106 you're through, Ms. Bolin, let's get their take on this thing. I don't mean to run you off if you got some more for us. Mr. Coates, did you draw the black bean? MR. COATES: Well, I think I'm going to bring the other black beans with me. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. COATES: This is Sharon Capeheart; she's my deputy. She keeps up on a daily basis with Diane and with the transfers and the supplements. This is Kirk Griffin; he's my chairman. And, as y'all know, we got a new system two years ago, and we used to be on the same system. We used to be with the same company you're with, Tyler Technologies. We waited for a year, waiting for them to get the problem solved with their appraisal software. My neighbor down in Kendall County purchased the system, and ended up basically just trashing it and going with the same company. JUDGE TINLEY: You're talking about the Tyler system? MR. COATES: Yes. So, their appraisal -- their appraisal system has had problems from the get-go, and this was the new system they called -- MS. CAPEHEART: Orion or Odyssey. MR. COATES: -- Orion or Odyssey. I called it Space Odyssey because it was a mess at the time. And we were in hopes that the County would be able to continue with the 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 107 same system we were with. We were basically forced to go Technologies over to True Automation, so that's a lot of the problems. Long story short, we're willing to work any way we can with the County and with Diane to resolve any issues that are at hand. If there's anything that our software is doing to y'all's software, I've already talked to the president of the company -- of True Automation; they're willing to work with Diane, with Tyler Technologies, with whomever to get this issue resolved the quickest, the cheapest, and, you know, the best way possible. So, perfect world, it would be great if we were on the same system. Now, we've got two other taxing entities that are on the same system we're on. We have three other appraisal districts that have overlapping jurisdictions that are on the same system we are. So, basically, as far as the appraisal districts, the majority of the appraisal districts -- the vast majority of the appraisal districts have switched over to True Automation from Tyler Technologies. And I'm not one to -- you know, to point the finger, blame anybody or anything; I'm more solution-oriented. And, you know, that's what we're here for. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 108 JUDGE TINLEY: But being on different systems certainly -- MR. COATES: It makes -- JUDGE TINLEY: -- opens the door for difficulties? MR. COATES: Yes, sir, definitely. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Mr. Emerson, you had a MR. EMERSON: He answered it. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. COATES: And I -- Commissioner Baldwin, thank you for those kind words. That's the first time you've ever said I was a gentleman. I appreciate that. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MR. COATES: You've been to my office several times, and I never heard "gentleman" come out of your mouth. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We've got it on the record; we can get you copies of it. MR. COATES: I'm going to frame it, put it up. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Fourth? MR. COATES: Yes? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Given that you're on a different system than we are, can you talk to each other back and forth? Is there a relationship? MR. COATES: Yes. There's supposed to be, yeah. There is an interface. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 109 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Supposed to be. You can do it? MR. COATES: Well, not directly. MS. CAPEHEART: The system you're currently on? MR. COATES: Well, isn't there a transfer process? MS. CAPEHEART: I send them e-mails, transfer the -- MR. COATES: She does this on a daily basis. MS. CAPEHEART: I send the files to -- MR. COATES: Why don't you tell them how it works. MS. CAPEHEART: Basically, what we do is we make the changes on our system, we close it out, and I create files and I e-mail those to Diane. And we -- they're referred to as supplements; that's what they show up as on her system. That is -- and that's basically how it's been working. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can we access each other's database? MS. CAPEHEART: No. MR. COATES: Not directly. MS. CAPEHEART: No. MR. TROLINGER: Now, the web site, you can access both on a daily basis. MS. CAPEHEART: Yeah, but that web site isn't up to date now. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 110 MR. TROLINGER: Which one? MS. CAPEHEART: The True Automation one is the only ~ one we got. MR. TROLINGER: It's not up to date? MS. CAPEHEART: About every month. MR. TROLINGER: Oh, I didn't realize it was not -- it's not live? It's not real? MS. CAPEHEART: No. No, it's not live. MR. TROLINGER: Okay, I stand corrected. Our system's live. It's online instantly. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MR. EMERSON: Quick comment, Judge. We're talking about being on the same system might resolve the problem. We've been communicating with a number of other counties, and I think it's interesting to note that San Patricio county is using Tyler Technologies both in their CAD district and in the county, and it's, quote, "been a nightmare since 2007." That's in their e-mail. MS. CAPEHEART: I actually spoke to that chief appraiser on Friday, too. JUDGE TINLEY: That may be somewhat attributable to the appraiser package that Mr. Coates mentioned was -- the gentleman from Medina, I'll refer to him henceforth, that -- that he referred to that he was hoping the bugs would get worked out so he could go -- but they just couldn't wait any 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 111 longer. That's when you went with True Automation. MR. EMERSON: I don't -- if I can add to that? JUDGE TINLEY: Surely. MR. EMERSON: I don't know which system the CAD districts have in these counties, but we've received e-mails from Hays County, Jackson County, Cochran County, San Patricio County, Grayson County, Limestone County, and Anderson County, and it's my understanding Gregg County also has issues. And all those counties are having a heck of a time with the same issues we are right now in their present -- JUDGE TINLEY: In appraisal or in the tax office? MR. EMERSON: In the offices. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. With Tyler? MR. EMERSON: Correct. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MS. CAPEHEART: Can I add something? I spoke with the chief appraiser from San Patricio on Friday, and he told me the problem they were having being on both -- they're on the same system on the appraisal and collection -- is things would calculate out correctly on the appraisal, but as soon as they transferred things to the tax side, it would totally give them different numbers. That's what Diane is also experiencing with our information. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Sheriff, you had two -- 1-26-09 112 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 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The information is being -- being transferred properly. It's all correct when it comes over here, but somehow when it gets loaded onto our system and you ask it to do a different function, it's never correct. Is that -- MR. COATES: I wouldn't say never. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, it has problems. MR. COATES: There's more errors than we should have. MS. CAPEHEART: We've never been able to find a consistency as to what triggers it not to work correctly. And that's kind of what the chief appraiser from San Patricio is telling me too, and that they were finding it was dropping accounts off on the tax side of that too. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I can tell you that mine's at zero, and I knew I hadn't paid my taxes. MS. CAPEHEART: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. I'm sorry, Bruce. Question for the I.T. guy. Mr. I.T. guy, if we were to change the Tax Assessor/Collector's module out of the Odyssey system, what does that do to our interoperability between other things -- functions that we have? MR. TROLINGER: You mean if we change to the same system, True Automation? Well, we had the opportunity in 2005 to work this out, and we didn't then. I don't know if 1-26-09 113 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 we'll be able to now. MR. COATES: Sure, I think we can. MR. TROLINGER: But initially -- my initial -- perfect world was to have both entities on the same server. That -- that isn't going to happen. The next best thing is that we be on the same manufacturer's -- the same provider's system. That didn't happen, so now here we are in 2009 with major problems. And it was pretty easy to see it coming as a result of all that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think you missed the thrust of my question. My question was, if we were to change modules and go to a different software provider, like the Appraisal District has done, what does that do for our continued interoperability within the framework of our broad system, our financial package? What does that do to us? MR. TROLINGER: Right. So, if we undo that history and -- and make a big change right now and go to True Automation, and go through all that conversion -- is that what you're asking? If we switch systems? JUDGE TINLEY: I think his question is, how is it going to affect the rest of the county being on Tyler Technologies? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my question. MR. TROLINGER: Oh, it's a completely independent system from the courts and law enforcement and financial. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 114 It's -- the Tax Office is on its own server. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you're saying nothing? No -- no impact MR. TROLINGER: As far as -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- to anything else? MR. TROLINGER: As far as the other systems? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In the financial realm. MS. BOLIN: Right. MR. TROLINGER: As far as our tax collection, I correct. MS. BOLIN: Right. We're not connected at all with the financial part of it with our tax package. MR. GRIFFIN: Fourth mentioned something that I think is key to part of that; it's why -- one of the reasons that we went the route we did several years ago. Kerrville ISD, Ingram ISD, all the -- and several others, the big players that -- that the Appraisal District deals with on a daily basis, had previously gone to True Automation. So, when we -- one of our -- when the board sat down and said, "Okay, we need new software 'cause we're held together with bandaids and bubble gum right now," one of the reasons we went that direction was because the entities that we support, other than y'all, had already made that move, and it looked like it was going to be a good software program. And, to-date, it has been for us. So, one of the reasons we did 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 115 it was to be in line with our entities. As I said, except for y'all. Nothing personal in that one. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand your point. MR. GRIFFIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not sure my point is -- MR. GRIFFIN: I understand -- I understand where you're going, but I -- I just kind of wanted to put that in there, that K.I.S.D., as well as Ingram -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: So, what I'm hearing here is probably the utopian solution, if it can be done feasibly, would be to switch the tax package over to True Automation so that it's compatible with all of the other folks doing the same or similar work, and that that will not affect the law enforcement, the courts, generally administrative packages, because it's a stand-alone module. Is that -- MR. TROLINGER: That's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: -- in summary what I'm hearing? MR. TROLINGER: That's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. And the Sheriff. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What kind of cost does Tyler need to pay to have that system installed? MR. TROLINGER: Let me answer that real quick, 'cause in 2005 we were looking at $91,000 for Tyler Technologies versus $127,000 for True Automation. And at the 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 116 time, Central Appraisal said they were not going to switch software systems, or were going to stay with what they had, so we chose the lowest cost -- MR. COATES: We never said that. MR. TROLINGER: -- at the time. At the time, you know, it's -- what do you choose? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we are where we are. Let's see where we're going. I think that's the important thing. Sheriff? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The issue -- and with Diane saying she found that it had 10 properties, I got a phone call even at my residence from one of our taxpayers, and this taxpayer's taxes alone for the county are over 30,000, okay? And he did not get a tax bill from the County at all this year. He got -- and when he called to check on it, he did get his Ingram school taxes. Now, part of his property's also in Kerrville. He -- he did not get his Kerrville taxes, his K.I.S.D. taxes, or his county, okay? When he called to check on it, what he was told -- and I don't know what this is, or whether it's true or not, but what he was told -- and I'm just not going to put out the name, even though I have it -- by somebody at the Tax Office was that if you protested or appealed your taxes, you did not get a bill this year. MS. BOLIN: Exactly. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That the Appraisal District or 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 117 whatever had -- that information -- all that information had gotten lost. So, every taxpayer that appealed their taxes did not get a tax bill this year, so I would assume that's going to be a lot more than 10. The other thing is -- is that they were told -- you know, this man said, "What am I supposed to do?" There wasn't an answer to that. So, he came down and paid it off his estimated, and said the heck with whatever the -- the appeal did. But that's City of Kerrville taxes and everything else. That anybody that appealed theirs, according to what he was told, didn't get a !, MS. BOLIN: The way that that works is, the Appraisal District flags it for the Appraisal Review Board hearings, and until that time, Tyler does not load any of the information for A.R.B. hearings on the system. I have talked to them the last two years about it, and they said it's just -- they can't pay on it. Well, according to law, they're supposed to pay the unprotected amount. But we can't collect it because we don't have anything, because Tyler doesn't want to accept what the Appraisal District sent to us. And I do know the school districts have the A.R.B. information, but we don't get it, because Tyler says we're not supposed to have it until the A.R.B. hearing is over. And personally, I think that's wrong, 'cause that gives us no information at all for the current year. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 118 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That goes back to the question I asked earlier, if there was -- if there was interface between these two systems. Can we take data from their system and vica-versa? Now you're telling me no. MS. BOLIN: Well, no, we can't do it if they have a flag on it. Otherwise, we take the information that they send us. MS. HYDE: There's not an interface, what he's asking. MR. TROLINGER: To uncomplicate it, to bring some understanding to it, it's about the data and it's about bringing the data from the Central Appraisal into our system. And when that flag occurs and we have to bring that new data in from True Automation into our system, there's a problem in Tyler Technologies apparently saying, well, it needs to be flagged one way, and we don't have the capability to do otherwise. So, that talks again to my database analyst comment earlier. We need someone at some point that can handle this data in-house to resolve these issues. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So, what my guy's telling me is right; everybody that appealed their taxes didn't get a I tax bill this year, and still haven't. MS. BOLIN: From us. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: From here. MS. BOLIN: Yes. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 119 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay. He got his Ingram share. But from -- if they appealed their taxes, they didn't get it from the County. MS. BOLIN: Didn't get it from Kerr County. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We contract with the City and K.I.S.D.? MS. BOLIN: Yes -- not K.I.S.D., but the City. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The City. JUDGE TINLEY: City, Headwaters, U.G.R.A. MS. BOLIN: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: So, those of the lesser entities. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How many people appealed their taxes here and still haven't yet -- MS. CAPEHEART: These were the late ones that we hadn't heard yet, right? My understanding, after certification -- MR. COATES: Prior to certification, they got it. This is the supplement after -- the supplement to the tax bill. So -- MS. CAPEHEART: We -- the last round of A.R.B.'s were held in October. MR. COATES: Certified. MS. CAPEHEART: And that's where all these were on, I was October. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only thing this man got was 1-26-09 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 his -- that early statement says what your statement for the year is going to be, okay? And his are well over 30,000 that he pays, and he never got anything else after that, 'cause he did file an appeal. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Has he gotten -- has he gotten -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, he came down and paid it off his estimated statement. He's never gotten anything. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we all have your home telephone number? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No. JUDGE TINLEY: We need to get that and put that on the record, don't we, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: He was -- he was afraid a lot of that may have been my salary. JUDGE TINLEY: We could have handled it that way. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I told him he needed to go pay it real quick. JUDGE TINLEY: It occurs to me that one possibility we may be looking at in addition to the training that's upcoming -- incidentally, when is that going to be? MR. TROLINGER: It has not been scheduled, but I will watch for that closely. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Would be to take a look at 1-26-09 121 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the tax module maybe being switched over, and how we can do that, if it's -- MS. BOLIN: I wouldn't have a problem. JUDGE TINLEY: -- economically feasible. MS. BOLIN: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. MS. BOLIN: I have not checked into it, but I can get the information. JUDGE TINLEY: I think we need to get that information as -- as a viable option. MS. BOLIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Talking about $100,000, ~ ballpark? MR. TROLINGER: It was $127,000 in 2005. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 2005? MR. TROLINGER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Cheaper now. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Should be cheaper now. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Where else are we on these two agenda items? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What about the -- what about 17? JUDGE TINLEY: It's out there in the open. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do we need to do to authorize the County Attorney and -- 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 122 JUDGE TINLEY: Auditor. And/or Auditor, the way it's styled. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not sure the Auditor is the right -- just my opinion, I'm not sure the Auditor is the right person to have in there, but that is the way it's styled. MS. BOLIN: Commissioner Baldwin, I think the reason that the Auditor's in there is because she wanted to do three years audit to see if we lost any other revenue from Tyler, in light of the situation we have this year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Makes sense. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I would hope she would do that anyway, whether she's on this little group or not. But, I mean, I -- Rex, do you have any thoughts? I mean, what do you want to do here? MR. EMERSON: Well, I think maybe the proper thing at this point is just give us the go-ahead to work with Diane and see exactly where we are and how big a hole we're in. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You need a court order of some sort to do that? MR. EMERSON: I don't know that we need a court order. Just an unofficial blessing would work. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: God bless you, Rex. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, God bless. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: You asked for it. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 123 JUDGE TINLEY: Go forth. Go forth. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And don't back up. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go to our 11:30 timed item. It's a bit past that. Number 20; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on proposed agreement between Kerr County Historical Commission and Schreiner University. Mr. Luther? MR. LUTHER: Yes, good morning, Judge Tinley, members of the Commission. We're here to finalize this agreement between Kerr County Historical Commission and Schreiner University. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mr. Luther, could you give me just one second to get the thing up here? I want to ask you a question before we get too far in it. MR. LUTHER: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where's that backup? JUDGE TINLEY: Oh, under 20. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Number 20. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hold on just a second. Let's see, hold on just a second. Well, I would ask -- I was asked a question this morning about -- and I can't seem to find it now -- about some verbiage here. Here it is, the ~! head of the actual agreement. It says, "Agreement for Long-Term Loan." MR. LUTHER: Yes. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 124 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, you and I understand what that means, what "long-term loan" means. MR. LUTHER: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But there are a couple of folks in the community that do not understand that language. MR. LUTHER: Well, what that means is that the materials that are being loaned to the Logan Library at Schreiner University remain in the possession of Kerr County, and they remain the County's property. Well, we are loaning these materials to be digitized and made available to the public through their Latham library system. They have a Texas Hill Country special collection within the Logan Library, and it's a selection of books, photographs, documents, papers, that sort of thing. We are loaning them our collection from the Kerr County Historical Commission, not only to be digitized and made available worldwide, but also to be preserved in a professional manner, restored and preserved in a professional manner. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The ownership will not I transfer? MR. LUTHER: Ownership does not transfer. That's why it's called a long-term loan. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner Baldwin is kind. I'm one of those resident dummies that asked the question, and I'm wondering if the title of your proposed 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 125 agreement shouldn't say "Agreement for Long-Term Loan of Kerr County Historical Properties." That way there is no confusion as to whether that is a loan of our historical properties, or whether it is a loan of taxpayer dollars. MR. LUTHER: Oh. Well, it says right in the -- under Purpose, the first -- well, it's the only sentence there. It says, "...provided by Schreiner University for the Kerr County Historical Commission's archives and artifacts." COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm only dealing with the title. MR. LUTHER: Well, we could add "archives and I artifacts" -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wonderful. MR. LUTHER: -- to the title. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wonderful. See how easy that was? MR. LUTHER: Okay. Let me just say that this -- this is a very interesting confluence of what we might call digital waves; that we've finally reached the point where Logan Library at Schreiner University has reached the digital -- digitization stage in their library collection, and we at the County Historical Commission are arriving at the same point at the same time. I am told by those who know that this is probably the first one of these in the country. And we are not behind the wave this time; we are the wave in 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 126 terms of doing this type of technology. I know that the people in Austin at the Texas Historical Commission want to do a report on this to make it a model for other counties to follow throughout Texas. If the purpose of both of our organizations is to make information available to the public, there's no better way than this. Rather than having to come to the courthouse, go with one of our staff down to the -- to the collection and dig through cardboard boxes full of things, now they can just go online and do that. And this fits in very well with our web site which John has so professionally handled in getting up and running. So, I think it's a win-win for everybody. We get our collection protected and maintained and enhanced. The Logan Library's Hill Country collection -- special collection gets a great amount of new material. And I -- I would also like to say that this is not a static sort of program. It's a dynamic -- we are constantly, constantly collecting new material. And as one article comes out or one new wrinkle in this comes out, more people are coming on board to donate stuff or get historical markers and that sort of thing. So, I see it as a i win-win. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do too. I see it as fantastic. I mean, it's incredible. Incredible. JUDGE TINLEY: Doctor, with the -- with the knowledge that all of this information is going to be 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 127 digitized and cataloged and available for wide dissemination, has that -- has that had a positive effect on potential contributors to -- to historical artifacts? MR. LUTHER: Oh, yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Bringing them to your care, custody, and control? MR. LUTHER: You know, last week in the Times, through -- Kathie Walker's here from Schreiner University. Through her offices, I did this article on -- on the western cattle trail, and since that article came out, I've had five e-mails. I've got a number of field trips to make this week out to people's ranches who want us to look at stuff and photograph stuff so that there's a permanent record of it. Oftentimes we will go out and -- and without asking to put up a marker or anything like that, we will simply record something, to photograph it, get a plat map of it or something like that so that if it's gone later, we'll know about it. And I think the prime example is this old Kerrville Sanatorium that's up behind Cecil Atkission's place. It was built in 1929. It's still standing. It was a cutting-edge technology in terms of architecture at that time, with hollow clay the ventilation and flagstone rock and that sort of thing, a number of cottages and a main building. It's still there. I wouldn't have known about it if I hadn't taken my truck out there to get the taillight 1-26-09 128 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 replaced. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Who owned it? MR. LUTHER: Well, right now it's owned by Cecil I Atkission. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean who owned it? Who I built it? MR. LUTHER: When I was going back through the newspaper, I found a reference to this place opening in 1929 by a guy named T.L. Cullum, C-u-1-1-u-m, but we've been unsuccessful in tracking that property and ownership down by that name, so we're going to have to work back through deed registration and find it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think it's a positive move in the right direction, and I support it. MR. LUTHER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's another one on the south side of town too that goes back to that era, and that's Scofield School for Girls. MR. LUTHER: Yes, but that's been converted to a private residence. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I understand. MR. LUTHER: But it's still there, and we need to record it. Yes, sir, we have an unending list. We've got a number of things already coming up this year. It's just a matter of time, money, and finding sponsors. And this year 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 129 we're very fortunate that both Bill Rector and -- and Tom Daniel at the bank are going to sponsor markers for the Old Spanish Trail and for the Western Trail. And this is all part of a larger county heritage tourism effort, because the more of this we have, the more people will come here. And we're -- (Cell phone rang.) It's the president, I'm sure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is the fine up to $100 now? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I thought it was $150. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A hundred -- oh, there's lunch money right there. MR. LUTHER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Buys more than tortilla soup, doesn't it? MR. LUTHER: And let me just say that -- well, heck, I can't remember what I was going to say. Kathie Walker is here from Schreiner, and Connor, who's one of the librarians there, to answer any questions that you might have. JUDGE TINLEY: Any questions, comments from members of the Court? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. MR. LUTHER: Otherwise -- JUDGE TINLEY: We don't have a motion yet, do we? 25 ~ THE CLERK: No, sir. 1-26-09 130 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 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do have a question, Judge, to the County Attorney. You have signed off on this document and it's ready to go? MR. EMERSON: Except for changing the title, it's ready to go. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, okay. I move that we approve the agreement between Kerr County Historical Commission and Schreiner University. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Is that with the changed title? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's with the changed title. JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second. Further uestion or discussion on the motion? A11 in favor q 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. LUTHER: Thank you, Judge. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Got her done. Thank you, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate it. Let's go to Item 19; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to discuss 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 131 various county revenue sources and placement of funds. Commissioner Oehler? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes, sir. I put this on the agenda. Just, I think, need some clarification on -- on some of our revenues and how those revenues are being used during the budget year. The County Attorney, he and I have talked a little bit about this. He has some revenues that -- that come to him that are eventually deposited with the Treasurer, I believe, and they're disbursed in certain ways, and if you'd like to elaborate on that a little bit, I'd appreciate it. MR. EMERSON: Sure. We have a couple sources of revenue for our office. The one that y'all are most familiar with is the hot checks. Last year we generated $37,911 in fees collected, and it's my understanding that that's deposited straight into the general revenue. Now, I don't know that; the Treasurer and the Auditor would have to tell you. The other two fees that we collect are the discovery restitution; it was 3,133 last year, and then the new pretrial diversion income that's collected. Last year we collected $16,000 in fees, and then there's approximately 31,000 that the Treasurer distributes out to the Clerk's office and the Probation Department. Now, I'm not sure what the proper procedures are for depositing those, but that's why I go through the Treasurer, so that it can be done 1-26-09 132 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 properly and I'm not guessing on how to take care of this. The only other source of income we have is if we settle a civil suit, we might collect attorney's fees for the county, or damages, that type of issue. But it's my understanding that it goes into the general revenue fund, and I'm not sure how it's apportioned out from there. JUDGE TINLEY: I recall back when you quit maintaining the hot check fund, for example, in-house, and you turned that directly to -- to the county. Something in the back of my mind tells me that there was a court order at that time that directed that those funds go directly into the general fund. That may be something that -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think that's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: -- Ms. Thompson -- and if that's the case, why, if that's where they're going, that's probably why they're going there. If not, you know, there may be some difference. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, those funds, like -- I guess my question maybe is to either -- I guess Mindy first. Let's just take the hot check fund, for instance. MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's been turned over to the County. Is that -- that goes into the general fund. Are those funds budgeted towards some expenditure for that year? MS. WILLIAMS: Well, first off, they're not going 1-26-09 133 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 into the general fund. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. MS. WILLIAMS: When the funds were initially set up, we set up a separate bank account. Those moneys every month are put into a separate bank account. And I believe at that time, the County Auditor -- the agreement was that once a year, we would take surplus out of that money and then turn it over into the general fund. That's how it's been handled the last number of years. If it needs to be put directly into the general fund, then all I need to do is be told that we need to close that bank account out. We'll put the moneys -- when Rex's office brings it in, we'll put it into a line item in the general fund. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What is the benefit of putting it -- having this little account? What is the benefit? Is it making money or anything? MS. WILLIAMS: It's an interest-earning account, but we know right now that interest is not very good anywhere. No, it -- it's just the way it was set up a number of years ago. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Well, we haven't been doing this that long, though. JUDGE TINLEY: Are there -- are there not provisions that those funds be used for particular 1-26-09 134 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 expenditures in connection with your office? MR. EMERSON: There are if I expend them, if I expend the money. Now, it's my understanding that when we made this agreement back in '05, that the way the office was previously run was I had the county budget and I had what I'm going to call a ghost budget that was run out of the hot check account. And what we did was consolidate those two budgets into my county budget so that everything's run I through one budget line in the county system. And it's my ~' understanding that -- I mean, this may just be a play on words, but basically, all that money coming in can '~ theoretically be credited to the County Attorney's budget so ~~ ', that we're in compliance with the statute. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, what you're saying is that the money from that hot check fund needed to be credited back to a budget -- your -- your budget annually? MR. EMERSON: In theory. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: In theory. I mean, you can't spend it twice. I mean, -- MR. EMERSON: Right. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- we shouldn't. MS. WILLIAMS: I think the understanding was that -- kind of a trade-off. Rex gets the money in his general fund budget. The moneys that he brings in from the 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 135 hot checks would offset what he's getting in his general fund budget. JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm. MS. WILLIAMS: But for some reason, it was set up into a separate bank account, a separate fund, and that's where it is right now. If it needs to be handled differently, we can do that. JUDGE TINLEY: Isn't that a simple way to figure out how much -- what kind of revenue that's generating, by putting it -- MS. WILLIAMS: A separate fund. JUDGE TINLEY: -- in a separate account? MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. And there is a -- a sweep account tied to it. We've got the hot check checking account; we have a hot check sweep account. The sweep account was set up with a $25,000 balance. It was paying a higher rate of interest. It still probably is, even though interest rates are probably in the ditch right now. But, yes, and at one certain point in the year, I will notify Rex that, okay, we have "X" number of dollars in both these accounts. We can transfer this amount easily without having to close the sweep account or hamstring anything else. And usually he shoots me back a reply and says go ahead and transfer it, and that's what we would do at that point in time. We leave the money in there during the year so that 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 136 the balance will build and build and build. MR. EMERSON: The only account that has to be isolated for purposes of my office is my trust account, and that has to be maintained separately to protect all the clients' money. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And for what reason would we want to track and keep -- keep a record of the hot check? I ~ mean, -- MS. WILLIAMS: Well -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- I'm trying to figure out why you have the little account thing. I don't get that. MS. WILLIAMS: Depends on, I guess, how much originally was added to Rex's budget, and the moneys that he was collecting kind of offset it. You know, times being as they are, the revenues are not -- well, they may be more now. You may be having more business with the -- with the way times are going. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I bet you do, don't you? MS. WILLIAMS: I think that that was basically the idea, just to see how much money he was actually bringing in, and then the following year's budget, okay, you brought in $80,000 -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, maybe that's the reason to keep it in the thing. I don't know. MS. WILLIAMS: It might be. 1-26-09 137 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's just hard -- it seems to me like by doing that, how do you budget every year? How do you budget for what your projected revenue is going to be on the hot check fund? MR. EMERSON: You can probably budget within 2 or 3 percent, 'cause it's pretty consistent. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Pretty consistent? MR. EMERSON: It dropped -- if you just historically go back and look at it, it dropped between 4 and 5 percent a year for seven or eight years when debit cards were becoming popular, and the independent check-cashing machines were -- were consolidating into the businesses. But now that that's stabilized for the last few years, it's been ~ pretty consistent. JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Williams? MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: If this -- if these funds were to be deposited directly into the -- not into a separate account, couldn't it be coded in such a manner that at any particular point in time, if you wanted to ascertain how much those funds were up to that date, that it could be ascertained by coding them in a particular manner? MS. WILLIAMS: I think we could probably -- yes, we could take that fund -- right now it's sitting as an independent fund. It's not consolidated in our pooled cash 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 138 accounts, which are like the general fund, Road and Bridge, huge. We could have Incode set that fund into the pooled cash. It would continue to keep its cash account, its revenue line items, everything. You could still isolate it. It would be -- JUDGE TINLEY: For informational purposes. MS. WILLIAMS: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: And then as long as we appropriate in the County Attorney's budget an amount at least equal to what that generated, we can say that's where that came from. MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah -- yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That seems like a solution. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We beat that dead horse long enough. Want to move on? JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, okay. How many of these do you got, Bruce? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I got quite a bit here. This may take a while, Judge, to get to the bottom of where I'm trying to go. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Eva has told me, and I believe it's correct, that last year, that there was a sum of money that was reimbursed to the county for overpayment, basically, of claims. And, Eva, how much was that last year, in '07-'08? 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 139 MS. HYDE: We had about $186,954.53 that we can track. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what you can track, exactly. That was '06 -- I mean '07-'08? MS. HYDE: '07-'08. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 186,000 plus. MS. HYDE: Right. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What happened to that money? MS. HYDE: I gave it to the Treasurer. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You gave it to the Treasurer? MS. HYDE: I gave those checks to the Treasurer. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What did you do with it? MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. That money went into the health insurance clearing account, and that account was set up -- I've got some spreadsheets here; I'll let y'all hand them out. All of them -- I think, yeah, I'd better have one. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: She gave you two. MS. WILLIAMS: Or maybe have I one. Okay. Back in February of last year, the County Auditor, Eva, and I decided we were going to set up a separate bank account at our depository bank, and this account would have the moneys put in it from the payroll, where the County's portion for the employees' insurance, dependent coverage, moneys that the dependents -- employees pay for their dependent coverage. We wanted this account set up so that FARA could draft it once 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 140 they had been given the approval on the claims, and the fixed -- monthly fixed expense. When we were with Mutual of an e-mail to Jeannie and I, "We need approval for FARA to draft 'X' number of dollars." I check the account, make sure we've got money in it. We give them the okay. They draft, and we're fine. We set this up initially in February. We had to open it with $100,000 so that we could have the moneys there, because we did have some claims that were -- were pending. The money that goes in there is the money that the County pays for the employees, employees' dependent coverage, retiree payments, any stop loss reimbursements that we will get from FARA, because H.R. -- Eva is checking that to make sure that -- that they're not overcharging us. Am I right on that one? MS . HYDE : Mm-hmm . MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. Any payments by an employee who is out on leave, and they have dependent coverage, they have to pay their premiums; the County's not going to carry it for them. So, what I did is I went back to the date that we started this account, and I've run current up to -- I 1-26-09 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 think it was the 19th. The cumulative totals across the fixed expense which you pay to FARA. The third, fourth, and fifth columns show the County-paid premiums for the employees from February of 2008 till the most recent payroll, dependent coverage, and retirees' payments. And then we have payments from the employees on leave, the stop loss reimbursements, the -- my total is a little bit higher than Eva's because we March of 2008. We put that into the account -- to the separate bank account. We also get payments from -- for COBRA coverage from former employees that are on COBRA. We get that. Bottom line is, if we hadn't had Eva's diligence in trying -- in getting us the stop loss payments, that's $188,000. Even with that, we would basically be roughly $260,000 in the hole, but we'd have had to transfer that money out of the Treasurer's account in order to cover those claims. The claims are weekly. Our payroll is about every two and a half weeks. And, roughly, it's 80-something thousand dollars, but all it takes is a couple of big weekly claims to zap that. And I apologize it being on legal paper, but my eyes are bad, so I made it big. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mine are too. That's great. JUDGE TINLEY: In essence, what you're doing, 1-26-09 142 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Ms. Hyde, is on claims that we've paid that, in essence, run over our stop loss limit -- MS. HYDE: We're beating the bushes. JUDGE TINLEY: We've overpaid, so we're getting that money back from the stop loss carrier for the portion that it ran over in reimbursements from them; is that correct? MS. HYDE: (Nodded.) JUDGE TINLEY: Is that the bottom line where we're going here? MS. HYDE: Sort of, kind of, yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MS. HYDE: Because also what we watch is we watch FARA and what FARA's paying out via Texas True Choice to make sure that we're not being overcharged by the entities that are charging FARA. So, for example, since the Sheriff is sitting here and he knows about them, I'm not going to name any names, but we now have three that we've worked on that employees have been overcharged, and they have paid, and we have busted our tails to get that money back, not only for the employees but for the county. So, when we talk about diligence, you know, $800, $900 to some employees is a huge chunk. And when we pay it from Texas True Choice and the employee pays it as well, to me that's a double hit, and so a lot of times we can get both back because of the error. How 1-26-09 143 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 did I say that? Did I say that okay without getting in trouble? Lawyers? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, basically, there is no -- what you would -- what you might call a reserve. MS. HYDE: No, I don't have any sort of reserve. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What you get back flows into paying claims, rather than -- it was not budgeted money. MS. HYDE: I don't reckon it was budgeted, because how would you know? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How would you know? How would you budget? How would you pay these claims if you weren't getting this money back, is my question. MS. HYDE: I just get the checks in, I hand them to Mindy. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How can you pay claims if you didn't get the money back? MS. WILLIAMS: We would have to transfer the money out of the Treasurer's account, which we might -- we hit a GL code, transfer it -- physically transfer it from one bank account to the other in order to be able to pay the claims. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. So, in essence, we budget a certain amount of money for claims every year. We -- up to our stop loss level. Is that correct? MS. HARGIS: No, we actually budget -- the way that I understand it, Eva can address this better than I, the 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 144 is set up is that the amount of funds that go into this have to come from active employees, so if a position is open, then that amount of money doesn't come forward. It is encumbered and it is in the line item that has been budgeted, but it doesn't move because of the payroll system and the way it's designed. So, as long as we don't go over the total amount that we encumber at the end of the year, which is what you encumber, yes, she's moving money. The problem is, we need to move probably some expense money from certain departments to get it over there, but it's set up to expense only through payroll right now, and that's the way that it's done. So, it -- because this particular account doesn't have any funds does not mean it's not budgeted; it just means that we didn't have enough people who paid in, and therefore their $620 a month did not go into this fund. So, the main thing we need to look at, I think, would be our overall number from October 1 of this year to September 30th, and that we should watch with our budget, and do a budget amendment if that was required. But, as Mr. -- 1-26-09 145 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 as Commissioner Oehler said, we don't have a reserve. And I would suggest to the Court if -- if you wanted an extra amount of reserve to be put in here, I would suggest that we do that at budget. We can do it any time that you want to do it, but I would suggest that if you were not comfortable, that whatever premium we used -- either we go to the ceiling and budget the ceiling that the -- that the insurance agent gives us, or we decide that we want to budget a reserve. We can do that by either increasing the amount of the -- of the contribution that we want to put in these line items, or we can actually set aside. I would caution you, and -- and the external career, that -- not to reserve money necessarily for a specific purpose, because what happens is, if you need it, you can't, because you've got it in the court documents. So you don't want to do that, but there are other ways of doing it, and I don't think it would be a bad idea, perhaps, to think about that. I think that Ms. Hyde and I discussed that. We tried a system that we thought might work, and it just -- it was too complicated. It's -- we can also set aside moneys that are just flat in the nondepartmental, and that are set there for overages, and budget those as well. So, there are ways of doing that, and we'll let the Court decide how they want to tell us to do that. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 146 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. That gets me down to another question. Mrs. -- Ms. Hyde, you -- you gave Ms. Hargis a position schedule; is that correct? Of all positions to be funded? MS. HYDE: We gave her the position schedule, yeah. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: For everything that was approved by the Court, all the employees and a full and complete position schedule that needed to be funded by the budget? MS. HYDE: We gave her the position schedule, yes, sir, including the district staff and -- the same position schedule that we've had. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What -- how many is that? How many people is that? MS. HYDE: Today? Or then? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, what you gave her. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: About 300. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: 300? 285? 228? MS. HYDE: Give me just a second. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. MS. HYDE: It -- it was 263, 264. And then you've got 11 retirees. MS. HARGIS: Twelve. MS. HYDE: It was 11, 'cause one died. That was it. Because your opt-outs -- your opt-outs are included in 1-26-09 147 1 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 position schedule. So, it's 263 -- 264 was active positions, and then you've got 11 retirees. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you count retirees in -- MS. HYDE: We counted them as a number -- as your total number when you're talking insurance. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, let me ask kind of a corollary question to Commissioner Oehler's. He asked about the position schedule that you gave. MS. HYDE: It would have had 263 people on it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Does that include positions that are budgeted or that are anticipated to be hired during the course of the year? MS. HYDE: It showed full and empty positions, if that's what you're asking. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess that's what I'm asking. So, if Road and Bridge anticipates hiring three people during the course of the year, is that included? Should be. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Whatever we've approved -- MS. HYDE: Yeah. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- for anybody to hire, whether an increase or a decrease. Whatever was the total number that was approved at budget time, the way I understand it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or the Sheriff, who 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 148 typically is under-hired on jailers sometimes. He anticipates hiring jailers -- always anticipates hiring jailers. MS. HYDE: Well, I mean, we didn't add any, though, to the Sheriff. I'll take up for you. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just asking generically here. MS. HYDE: It included all positions, both filled and non-filled. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, that's my question. Thank you. MS. HYDE: What was approved by the Court. JUDGE TINLEY: All authorized positions. MS. HYDE: Thank you. Thank you. There we go, yes, sir. All authorized positions. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And this number's 263? Or is it 274? MS. HYDE: No, it's 263 or 264; I can't grab it out of here. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, you don't add the 11 retirees in? MS. HYDE: We add it for insurance purposes, but not for budget. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, very good. Very good. That's what I was asking. Good. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 149 I ', COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay, next question. MS. HYDE: Dang. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We're all -- was everybody that was approved in that position schedule, did they all '~ I'~, have -- was there enough budgeted money to fund their health insurance and their liability insurance? MS. HYDE: You're going to have to answer that one. MS. HARGIS: Liability insurance? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Was there enough money budgeted to cover all the approved positions on the schedule for the entire year? MS. HARGIS: Based on -- I budgeted for -- I didn't budget for 263; I took the opt-outs out. And the reason that I had done that is because we were 400,000 over for the prior year, and I was trying to be very conservative with the budget because we were going to have to go up on the tax rate. I did not budget for the opt-outs, so there are 11 of those. They did -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, that $400,000 that we ran over actually was basically a reserve fund. It was -- it was in excess of what was expended. You basically took it on yourself to budget that into this year's payment of liability insurance and health insurance? MS. HARGIS: No, sir. No, sir, I did not budget -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What happened to it? 1-26-09 150 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ', MS. HARGIS: I did not -- I just didn't budget for 11 people. I did not -- when the funds close, when the expense -- when the expenses close, the expenses close into -- into the revenue, and that's the end of your year. I didn't move any of that money. If it's not used, it rolls up. That's the way that the ledger is set up. I didn't touch any of that money. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How do you intend on funding the health insurance and liability insurance whenever you have underbudgeted the position schedule? MS. HARGIS: I budgeted a million, seven -- I don't have the exact figure; I think it's a million, seven-three. The -- the floor was a million, six, and he gave the premium based on that. I was not privy to the discussions with the insurance agent or with Eva, and at -- during this -- this last budget time, I didn't budget the retirees, because I was told not to do that. I didn't budget the opt-outs because I didn't think that we should budget something we can't expense and -- and move forward. It just didn't make sense to me. I have been -- I've since been told that probably was not a correct thing to do. But I have -- you know, I was trying to be as conservative as possible and not leave as much on the table so that we wouldn't have to go up on the tax rate any more than we had to. And -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But that also is going to -- 1-26-09 151 1 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, if -- here's a scenario. If all the money that's needed to be expended for those health -- the health insurance and liability insurance -- some of those liability policies were left off of long-term employees, my understanding. MS. HARGIS: I don't know anything about the liability insurance. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You don't? MS. HARGIS: No, sir, I do not. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Ms. Hyde, we'll have to get with you again in a minute. MS. HARGIS: All I did was budget for end -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If we need to expend all those funds for a full position schedule that was authorized by this Court to fund in that budget, it will become a deficit budget. MS. HARGIS: The 11 -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: In the fourth quarter. MS. HARGIS: No, sir, I don't think it will. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How do you know that? MS. HARGIS: I don't know that for sure, but I do know that last year, we budgeted for a million, eight, and we spent a million, four. Gary Looney stood here and gave you those figures in court. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You better hope it works that way this year, because if it doesn't, what's going to happen 1-26-09 152 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is it's going to affect next year's tax rate. $400,000 is a penny and a half, to my best knowledge, of tax rate. MS. HARGIS: The total amount that Mr. Looney budgeted was two million, one, so a million, seven -- I'm not 400,000 off of what the insurance agent gave us as the ceiling. Even if I'd have budgeted two million, one, there is a possibility that the claims that we pay, if we have a bad year, will go over the two million, one. So if I had budgeted two million, one, I would still be in the same position, Commissioner Oehler. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. Well, we've had situations in the past where our claims exceeded the budgeted amount, I believe, in years past, in which case we always have to go to reserves to cover -- to cover the cost. What you're saying, if I understand correctly, is that if you -- taking last year, for example, you budgeted -- the budgeted amount was 400,000 more than the actual expenditure. MS. HARGIS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. So we didn't -- we didn't expend that money. MS. HARGIS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That then rolled back into reserves; is that correct? MS. HARGIS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 153 MS. HARGIS: So it is -- it's available in reserves. It's not -- it wasn't used for any other purpose. It was rolled into the reserves. it COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What was the reserves? The general fund reserve at the end -- as of September the 30th, 2008? MS. HARGIS: I think I gave you that in the budget book. I don't have the audited figures right now; I don't have that in front of me. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, my understanding that it was somewhere, by your calculations -- I'm not real sure what all you included in the reserves, whether you included other funds that may or may not be funds we can expend out of it to get it at a moment's notice for any unknown that might pop up. I don't have any idea what was in there. My understanding was at the time, it was somewhere around 17 to 19 percent. I hear recently that you're saying we have 25 percent reserves. MS. HARGIS: I think that if I'm correct, I had percentages on the side of the budget book, and I think I estimated the percentage to be about 23 percent. Until the auditors get finished with any of those situations, I based that calculation on receivables that would be coming to us, that are in the -- the courts at the time that we close out the books, and the cash balances that are in the bank at the 1-26-09 154 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 time. The receivables are 30-day receivables that we're due from court fines and fees. We probably -- they're already in there; we don't have the report at year-end, so you have to kind of estimate what those are going to be. And I went back on prior years. I used the same calculation that your auditor had used for the last 17 years. That's what I went by. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I guess the ultimate question I have to ask is, if we have 25 percent real money in our reserves, that's what starts us out for the first quarter of the year until we start getting tax money in. Why did you have to go -- or why did Mindy have to go to our -- to our Tax Assessor/Collector and take money from her account in order to pay December bills? MS. HARGIS: Because she didn't want to draw down from TexPool, is the reason she told me. It wasn't -- MS. WILLIAMS: I wasn't able to transfer the money out of TexPool. I was one day too late, with the holidays. It would not have hit until January the 2nd, and I did not want all the payroll and whatnot to pull our pooled cash balance into a negative at the end of December, so I asked Diane if she could give us an advance. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, how much money was left in our -- in the TexPool account? Was there enough to pay December's bills? 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 155 MS. WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah. Yeah. We had over three million -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. MS. WILLIAMS: -- in there. I just -- it was my mistake; I waited one day too long. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I wanted to have, is to find out why -- MS. WILLIAMS: Because I waited one day too long. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- we're getting funds whenever we're supposed to have a 25 percent reserve. MS. WILLIAMS: Right. But the money -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't believe that we do. I want that to be proven to me, that what funds are included in that, and not just maybe from other accounts that shouldn't qualify for that. I would like to know that we really have 25 percent. MS. HARGIS: I don't think that I put 25 percent. I said around 25 percent to Eva. I think I have that on the budget book on the side that the Judge asked me to account like that. It's based on the bottom line at the time, and it's an estimate. Keep in mind, we do that estimate in August. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'm looking forward to it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'd be surprised if we had 25. I would be surprised. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 I8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 156 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Be a real surprise to me if we have anywhere near 25, realistically. JUDGE TINLEY: I'd be happily surprised if we were at 25. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And the reason for me doing this exercise is more so than just the heck of it. We are going to be moving into some pretty critical times within the next year. We need to encourage everybody in this county to conserve their budgets as much as possible, hang onto that money, because whenever values stabilize, which they are probably going to do, our sales tax revenue is mostly likely going to go down. We are going to be in trouble for the 2009-2010 budget, and every penny that we can hang onto, we'd better hang onto it, or we won't be able to pay our bills. And I don't want this county to be bankrupt because of some finagling of funds around. I want to really know what we have. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is "finagling" really a word? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It might not be, but it's i mine . COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I like it. I use it. I use it too. I didn't know if you were using right angles or I not . JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it for that particular 1-26-09 157 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 agenda item, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That got me just exactly what I thought was going to happen. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. The only remaining item on the agenda is Item 21; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action regarding demotion due to decrease in job duties. Is that something that necessarily will go into -- needs to go to executive session, Ms. Pieper? MS. PIEPER: I don't think -- I think we can do it without going into executive session. What do you think, Eva? JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Pieper, has the affected employee or employees had the opportunity to appear here today? To be present? MS. HYDE: They're here. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. There's only one? There's one? MS. PIEPER: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, before we advance to that, just one caveat to add to the Groves contract, which would be authorizing you to sign it. I didn't make that as part of my motion, but it needs to be on the record to authorize you to sign the contract. JUDGE TINLEY: I assume nobody on the Court has any 1-26-09 158 1 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 with that, do you? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I expected it. I, JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, good. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Ms. Pieper? MS. PIEPER: Well, gentlemen, -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's that word again. MS. PIEPER: -- I have -- due to a decrease in job duties, I have demoted one of the employees in the office. About a year ago, I came to you and I requested a 2 and a half percent increase because of additional job duties. The performance is not up to par, so I have demoted that person just back to a regular deputy with the salary that the person ', was making at that point, and so I would like to be able to bank that 2.5 percent that was for this added additional duties, and once I get a new person trained, then give the 2.5 percent to my other deputy that is going to be in training. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's it? MS. PIEPER: That's my speech. Do you have anything? MS. HYDE: Not unless they ask. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: May I ask you, what -- what action does the Court take? MS. PIEPER: At this point, I don't think the Court 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 159 needs to take any action. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh. MS. PIEPER: Just keep it in the back of your mind that in a couple of months -- not anytime real soon. In a couple of months -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'll have a new trained employee? MS. PIEPER: -- I will have a new trained employee, and I would like to come back and at that point ask for that 2 and a half percent for the additional duties for the employee that we are training. JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it from your standpoint? MS. PIEPER: That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Keller, do you have anything you wish to respond? MS. KELLER: Yes, sir, I do have a comment regarding that. JUDGE TINLEY: Feel free to come forward. ', MS. KELLER: Do I need to give this to someone? Okay. My name is Ana Keller, and I'm here today to speak on my own behalf. This concerns the meeting that I had last week about the merit increase I did earn, as she mentioned, a year ago, October the 7th, 2007, which is in question today. And in this meeting, I was told that my responsibilities as the backup bookkeeper were going to be taken away due to 1-26-09 160 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 mistakes that I had made. I feel that this is an unjust act. I am the backup bookkeeper. Everyone makes mistakes. And it's kind of funny, you know, sitting here for the past hour and a half, how it's been all about mistakes concerning the deposit -- you know, everyone makes mistakes concerning the deposits, what I'm hearing, including the full-time bookkeeper. I know this because I've had to correct those mistakes also. The mistakes I made were mistakes that could be corrected and have been corrected. There is not one mistakes. Judge Tinley, Commissioners, this is going to be my seventh year with the county, and in those seven years, I've been granted two merit increases, one from Paula Rector when I was in the Tax Assessor's office, and the one that Jannett -- the clerk gave to me. I have also given my time on numerous occasions to work elections, and most recently I was the only Kerr County employee, other than the Sheriff, who stood up in front of everyone and proclaimed that we deserved our raises. Commissioner Baldwin, you called me your hero for that. And, Judge Tinley, the words to me were that the employees of Kerr County should be proud of what I've done for them. So, today I ask why -- why is this happening to me? Why couldn't someone try and help me just a little more to learn, you know, this deposit the way that is necessary? I also was just -- I was also told that this was 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 161 business, not personal, and I really hope that this is true, because right now it feels real personal. Gentlemen, in closing, I would like each of you to know that I have been worthy of the merits given to me. I am a hardworking employee. I do take my responsibilities seriously, and I am a trustworthy employee of Kerr County, and would like for you to consider that. Respectfully, Ana Keller. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Keller. Anything further with regard to this particular item, Ms. Pieper? MS. PIEPER: No, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Because this is a matter that is within the confines of your office and your authority dealing with your employees? MS. PIEPER: That is correct. And I have -- I have sent a personnel action form down to the H.R. Director with this. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was that again? MS. PIEPER: I sent a personnel action form that is required through our personnel -- county personnel policy if there's any kind of effect on employees. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. MS. PIEPER: So, that went down Thursday. II COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, no action -- no action by this Court is required at all? MS. PIEPER: No, sir. 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 162 JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further from any member of the Court on that item? Let's move on, then, to Section 4, the approval agenda, payment of the bills. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we pay the bills. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second the emotion. I JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second to pay the bills. Any question or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, hold on just a second. Because I am a nice guy, I went into the Auditor's office and they answered, I think, everything for me this morning, I believe. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that the reason? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Incorrect, I do have a question. JUDGE TINLEY: Incorrect that you're not a nice guy, or that they answered everything? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All of the above. I'm taking it all back. Here's the question. Just -- and I'm really speaking as a taxpayer right here. JUDGE TINLEY: As you should. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 3, the very bottom one, 198th District Court hires a private investigator, $570. JUDGE TINLEY: Check the last entry under 216th. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I couldn't find it. Well, anyway -- 1-26-09 163 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Middle of the page. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, there's one there. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 216th. JUDGE TINLEY: Three times as large -- twice as large, excuse me. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, they -- okay. Let's see here. We have $1,200 there and $570 on 198th, and we have two Texas Rangers that work for us, and we're still hiring people? JUDGE TINLEY: Those are payments to investigators that were hired by defense lawyers pursuant to authorization from the two courts, respectively. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: In cases where there were indigent defendants. And -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if you think I'm going.. to say, "Oh my god, I've made a horrible mistake and I'm embarrassed," you're crazy. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: This is still goofy. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Next month when you see one that has a payment to somebody who is now a former deputy, they created their own private investigation company here. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We got another one coming? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yep. You're going to have a 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 164 lot more. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They could fire those Texas Rangers and just use this guy. ~', COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I highly recommend it. He's ', a really sharp dude. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Probably this guy's doing it for the defense attorneys. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Next? Kathy's getting a little weary here; we need to close the thing up. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell you guys, I'm really disappointed in that. I wanted to rant and rave a little bit there. You just kind of threw, like, a bucket of cold water on me. I'm really embarrassed. JUDGE TINLEY: You weren't going to say that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah. I take it back. That was all. They were very nice to me and answered all my questions this morning. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Budget 1-26-09 165 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 amendments. We have a summary containing four budget amendments that have been presented along with the bills. Do I hear a motion that the budget amendments as reflected in the summary be approved as presented? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second it. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the budget amendments as reflected in the summary to be approved. Question or discussion? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. Under Item 2, unless I'm misreading this or don't understand it, we're making a -- a budget amendment, and where is that -- where is that 4,200 coming from? MS. HARGIS: That's a HAVA grant. We budgeted the revenue, but we neglected to budget the expense, so this is the expense to go along with the -- with the grant. The grant's 4,200, and this is 4,200. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Another question under Road and Bridge. Was there a piece of equipment that he picked up that he was not anticipating picking up? MS. HARGIS: He neglected to -- when I asked him if he had any more lease payments, he said no, and they did forget one, and so we're going to have to move -- this is their request that we move from their contingencies up, 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 166 because this was an existing lease they had to pay. So they -- JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. This was an existing lease that he'd somehow -- MS. HARGIS: He neglected to put it in his budget. JUDGE TINLEY: -- neglected to put it in. A I mistake. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this the amount that covers the balance of the year, or is this one month? MS. HARGIS: It's the balance. That's all of it. And then, of course, the last one is our Homeland Security grant, budgeting the revenue coming in and the revenue going out -- I mean, expense going out. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Which is the goofiest thing I've ever seen in my entire life. It appears that you're taking 90,000 from radio equipment and giving it to the federal government. But -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Then they're giving it back. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- then they're giving it I back. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Nobody wants it. JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 167 JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we have any late bills, Ms. Auditor? MS. HARGIS: No. JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly reports from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2; Justice of the Peace, Precinct l; District Clerk; and Constable, Precinct 3. Do I hear a motion that those reports be approved as presented? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to approve the indicated reports as presented. Question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Any reports from Commissioners in connection with their liaison or other assignments? Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Nothing. 1-26-09 168 1 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: Nothing. JUDGE TINLEY: Any reports from elected officials or department heads? Oh. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wow. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can we call out and get some pizza? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Here's something sitting here that's probably for y'all, just due to -- and part of it's based on Commissioner Oehler's comments. And this is a report I want to make, and I don't know if y'all can give me some guidance, but we're going to need it before the end of the year, is the fact a few months ago -- or few commissioners courts ago, there was some -- quite a few comments about my officers' overtime and comp time being built up and holiday and all that. So, we have been diligently trying to give officers off as much as we can possibly give them off to burn off some of that, and I had been paying them their straight time for the holidays when they worked. The problem we're going to see now is, just because of the holiday that was at Christmas and New Year's, that one extra pay, paying the officers that worked on those days, just for the deputies, was over $9,400. My overtime budget at the end of this month will be through for the year. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're going to have to give 1-26-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 169 a bunch of time off. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, Sheriff? Thank you. Any other elected officials or department heads? Seeing none, we'll be adjourned. (Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:55 p.m.) STATE OF TEXAS ~ COUNTY OF KERR ~ The above and foregoing is a true and complete transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 30th day of January, 2009. JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk BY : _ ~~G __ Kathy nik, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter 1-26-09 ORDER NO. 31162 KERR COUNTY TREASURER'S MONTHLY R}.;PORT Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 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 and accept the Kerr County Treasurer's Monthly Report Ior December, 2008. ORDER NO. 31163 QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT FOR QI1AR"1'1?R L;NI~ING l ?-31-2008 Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Acknowledge receipt of the Quarterly Investment from Patterson and Associates for the Quarter ending December 31, 2008. ORDER NO. 31164 SURPLUS EQUIPMENT Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 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 declaring one computer printer stand, inventory 11201, and one plastic computer desk, inventory #2655, as surplus property. ORDER NO. 31165 STATEMENT OF GRANT AWARD FOR FY 2009 FORMULA GRANT FROM TASK FORCE ON INDIGENT DEFENSE Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Accept the Statement of Grant Award for FY 2009 Formula Grant from the Task Force on Indigent Defense in the amount of $26,317.00, and authorize the County Judge to sign same. ORDER NO. 31166 REQUESTS FOR APPOINTMENT OF CLERKS AND ASSISTANT S FROM APPOINTED AND ELECTED OFFICIALS Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 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 the requests for appointment of clerks and assistants by Appointed and Elected Officials as follows: Maintenance Department Animal Control Information Technology ORDER NO. 31167 INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN KIRR COL1N"I'Y AND CITY OF KERRVILLE FOR REGUOLATION OF SUBDIVISIONS WI'l~l iIN "fHE CITY OF KERRVILLE'S EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 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 amendment to Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Kerr County and the City of Kerrville for Regulation of Subdivisions within the City of Kerrville's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction as follows: Section One: Duration of Agreement and 'Termination Item 13. to change the 90 day notification period to 30 days. ORDER NO. 31168 APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS WILLIAMS AND LETZ FOR NEGOTIATIONS ON CENTER POINT/EASTERN KERR COUNTY WASTEWATER PROJECT Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve appointment of Commissioners Williams and Letz to represent .Kerr County in negotiations with various governmental agencies for Interlocal Agreements that may be required for the Center Point/Eastern Kerr County Wastewater Project: Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Comfort WC & ID City of Kerrville Upper Guadalupe River Authority (UGRA) Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) ORDER NO. 31169 INTENDED USE PLAN FOR TRANSMISSION LINL FOR C,ENhER POINT/EASTERN KERR COUNTY WASTEWATER PROJECT Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 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 preparing and forwarding to Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) an Intended Use Plan (IUP) for Transmission Line portion of Center Point/Eastern Kerr County Wastewater Project as required between Center Point and a Wastewater Treatment Facility, to be offered for consideration as part of the proposed Federal Economic Stimulus Program. ORDER NO. 31170 COUNTY PROJECTS FOR STIMULUS FUNDING Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 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 prioritizing the list for county projects for stimulus funding as follows: 1. Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center (Ag Barn) 2. Water Line System at Airport 3. Center Point/East Kerr Water Project 4. Dam Repair 5. Off-System Bridges ORDER NO. 31171 LETTER OF CREDIT #8014 FOR ROAD IN LASSO RANCH SlJ13DIVISION Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 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 releasing the Letter of Credit #8014 for the road in Lasso Ranch Subdivision and accept the road for county maintenance, located in Precinct 3. ORDER NO. 31172 LETTER OF CREDIT FOR RANCHES OF SUNSET RIDGE OR REQUEST MAINTENANCE BOND Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Authorize Road & Bridge Department to get with Developer to get a new better of Credit #221 for Ranches of Sunset Ridge in the amount of $94,120.50, and extend the Letter of Credit for up to one year to March 26, 2010. ORDER NO. 31173 ANNUAL BIDS FOR ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTMENT Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioners Oehler/Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Authorize Road & Bridge Department going for annual bids for: Road Base Cold Mix Aggregate Emulsion Oil Corrugated Metal Pipe with the bids to be opened on March 9, 2009 at 10:00 A.M. and with the bids to be awarded on March 23, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. ORDER NO. 31174 RESOLUTION OPPOSING WASTEWATER DISCHARGE AT HILL COUNTRY CAMP ON HARPER ROAD Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioners Letz/Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Adopt Resolution opposing wastewater discharge at Hill Country Camp on Harper Road. ORDER NO. 31175 AGREEMENT BETWEEN KERB COUNTY AND GROVES AND ASSOCIATES FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR CENTER POINT/EASTERN KERR COUNTY WASTEWATER PROJECT Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 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 Agreement between Kerr County and Groves and Associates for Project Management Services for Center Point/Eastern Kerr County Wastewater Project. Contract total $29,750.00. NEED SIGNED AGREEMENT ORDER NO. 31176 KERB COUNTY HISTORICAL COMMISSION AGREEMENT WITH SCHREINER UNIVERSITY Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve the Agreement between the Kerr County Historical Commission and Schreiner University, with the change to the title of the Agreement, and authorize the County Judge to sign same. ORDER NO. 31177 CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, came to be considered by the Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are: Accounts Expense 10-General $ 200,825.46 12-Election Services $ 4,200.00 14-Fire Protection $ 30,000.00 15-Road & Bridge $ 159,062.23 16-2008 Capital Projects $ 1,146.00 18-County Law Library $ 5,527.51 19-Public Library $ 33,333.33 23-Juvenile State Aid Fund $ 2,945.00 27-Juv Intensive Prog-State $ 800.00 39-Grant H-Misdeamor Div $ 6,648.88 50-Indigent Health Care $ 30,972.90 76-Juv Detention Facility $ 9,814.17 83-216th District Attorney $ 1,524.08 86-216th CSCD $ 5,254.69 TOTAL $ 492,054.25 Upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts. ORDER NO. 31178 BUDGET AMENDMENTS Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve paying the Budget Amendments as presented. ORDER NO. 31179 MONTHLY REPORTS Came to be heard this the 26th day of January, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve the Monthly Reports from: JP #4 JP #2 JP # 1 District Clerk