1
3
.~
5
6
,~
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 '7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Monday, July 27, 2009
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H.A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4
O
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
I N D E X
July 27, 2009
--- Commissioners' Comments
1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
have ATM installed in the lst floor lobby
1.3 Presentation by Margie Jetton, Better Consumer
Choices, of Guardian Vendor Management Program
1.5 Presentation on proposed new library facility
and campus
1.2 Acknowledge receipt of quarterly investment
report from Patterson and Associates for quarter
ending 6-30-09
1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
adopt rules for Flat Rock Lake Park requiring all
animals to be on a leash at all times and not
restrict them to any particular area of the park
1.13 Public Hearing vacating lot lines on Lots 216
through 222 in Center Point Estates, Unit II
1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
vacate lot lines on Lots 216 through 222 in
Center Point Estates, Unit II
1.15 Public Hearing abandoning a road easement in
Center Point Estates, as shown in Volume 3,
Page 103 of Kerr County Plat Records
1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
abandon a road and convey to the owner in Center
Point Estates, as shown in Volume 3, Page 103
of Kerr County Plat Records
1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
authorize participation by Road and Bridge with
City of Kerrville on a sealcoating project for
Meadow View Lane
1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
amend plat for Lots 9 and 10 of Sleepy Hollow,
Section Two, pursuant to Subdivision Rules/Regs
PAGE
6
8
20
25
41
41
63
83
85
87
25
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
a
10
11
12
13
14
15
1n'
1 '7
18
19
2 ~~
21
22
23
24
2~
I N D E X (Continued)
July 27, 2009
1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for
approval on removing cattle guards on Wilson
Creek Rd., Precinct 3 90
1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
purchase used FEMA trailer from Texas Facilities
Commission Federal Surplus Property Program 93
1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
accept Mira Vista Lane N. in The Ranches of
Sunset Ridge Subdivision and release the
maintenance bond, Precinct 3 95
be studied 96,
133
1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
accept proposal from John Hewitt for Emergency
Action Plan for Ingram Lake Dam, Precinct 4 107
1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
authorize Kerr County Maintenance Supervisor
to go out for bid for electrical, plumbing,
HVAC, and pest control services 113
1.18 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action
regarding approving inmate telephone service
agreement with Global Tel*Link Corporation 113
1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action
regarding renewal of Texas Department of Public
Safety Interlocal Cooperation Contract 114
1.20 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
adopt amended bylaws/resolution dealing with
membership and duties of Library Board as
adopted by the Library Advisory Board 115
1.22 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action
concerning adoption of child safety fees by
Kerr County as permitted by TexDOT 117
1.23 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
proposed Disaster/Emergency Employee Policy
which allows reimbursement for employees during
disasters as permitted by state and federal regs 120
4
1
3
4
5
6
7
g
9
10
11
1?_
13
14
15
16
17
18
1a
20
21
22
23
24
2~
	I N D E X (Continued)	
	July 27, 2009	
1.24	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action	to
	return check to Hill Country Community MHM	R on
	CSU road/parking lot project	
1.25	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action	to
	write letter of support to LCRA on behalf	of
	Tierra Linda Volunteer Fire Department for	their
	grant request to help purchase new tanker	truck
1.26	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action	to
	approve and adopt Personnel Policy	
1.27	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action	to
	declare certain personal property as surpl	us;
	authorize County Clerk to trade/dispose of	same
1.28	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action	to
	afford public access to Kerr County wells	at
	Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center and litt	le
	league fields & associated issues	
1.21	Consider/discuss, take appropriate action	to
	approve and adopt ETJ agreement with City	of
	Kerrville	
1.29	Consider/discuss, take appropriate actions	
	regarding Court Compliance payments plans;	who
	sets plans, who has authority to set plans	, and
	when payments are made	
4.1 Pay Bills
4.2 Budget Amendments
4.3 Late Bills
4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports
5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee
Assignments
5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads
--- Adjourned
PAGE
123
124
125
126
127
136
149
155
158
165
166
173
180
5
1
.?
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
la
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Monday, July 27, 2009, at 9:00 a.m., a special
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in
the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse,
Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in
open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the
Kerr County Commissioners Court posted and scheduled for this
date and time, Monday, July 27, 2009, at 9 a.m. It is that
time now. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes, sir. Please rise; we'll
have an invocation and also a pledge of allegiance.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Please be seated. At
this time, if there's any member of the public or audience
that wishes to be heard on a matter that is not a listed
agenda item, this is your 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 located at the rear of the room. It's
not absolutely essential that you do that; it just helps me
to know that we have individuals that wish to be heard on
specific items. However, if we get to an agenda item that
you've not filled out a participation form and you do wish to
7-27-09
1
3
5
m
.~
8
~~
10
1:1
12
13
14
15
15
1 '7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
6
', be heard, get my attention in some manner and I'll see that
you have a reasonable opportunity to do so. But if there's
anyone that wishes to be heard on any matter that is not a
listed agenda item, come forward at this time, tell us what's
on your mind. Seeing no one coming forward, let's move on
with the agenda. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'll keep it short; we got a
long agenda. Last week I had the occasion to have a
conversation with TexDOT regarding the closing of 1340 during
bridge construction at Mayhew Crossing, which is close to
Stonehenge. The committee -- the bridge committee in Hunt
took a vote and it was split, but the people that voted no on
closing the road for two days felt like their vote carried a
little more weight. So, I called TexDOT and told them, "No
deal, you're going to have to do it the way it's originally
billed, no deviation, built half a section at a time." The
contractor got hold of TexDOT and said, "I got another deal
for you." And the reason that the residents were opposed to
it is because it was going to cut off EMS, fire, and
Sheriff's Department, so they kind of -- they countered back
and said, "Well, I tell you what, we'll guarantee that an
emergency lane will be open during the time of that
construction if that will help get it changed to where we can
do that, because it will save two months on the process and
probably a couple hundred thousand dollars. So, I called all
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1a
20
21
22
23
24
25
7
of them individually, got them all to agree to it, and it's a
done deal. And the committee -- all, I think, except one or
two members voted yea, and -- but the ones that are directly
affected voted for it, so that will proceed, and the closure
date for that is scheduled to be September the 11th,
6 o'clock in the evening until 5 o'clock on Monday morning,
and it'll be open again. But that -- that's some good news.
It took most of the day to get that done, but it did happen,
and I think it's the right thing to do, and we're all trying
to save money. And, you know, people talk about it, but
we're really going to do it. So, that's really all I have to
say.
JUDGE TINLEY: Isn't it amazing what a little
communication will do?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: A lot of communication.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If they have to get out,
they can always run around to Highway 41. It's a long ways,
but --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Either stay home or go around
the long way.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yep.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Or I guess they can walk
across the river and get a friend to pick them up. It's
pretty shallow right there.
JUDGE TINLEY: What do you have for us,
7-27-09
8
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1a
20
21
22
23
24
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'm not going to
bring up anything at this time. Later on, I have some things
on my mind, believe it or not.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Same, Judge. Nothing right
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Let's get to work.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's get on with our agenda. The
first item on the agenda is to consider, discuss, take
appropriate action to have an ATM installed in the first
floor lobby. Ms. Lyle?
MS. LYLE: Morning. I'm proposing to have an ATM
installed on the first floor within the courthouse as a tool
for convenience for taxpayers as well as employees for the
courthouse. Where the pay phone is installed right now, next
to County Court at Law, they would have access to a pay phone
-- I'm sorry, to a long distance line there, to electricity,
and also security, which is three requirements for the ATM.
I've contacted Security State Bank, which is the bank that
the County already uses, and talked with Mr. Steve Watson
about this, and we've kind of come up with a -- a good plan
to have it installed within a fair amount of time. I thought
25 ~ if he had anything to say or if you had any questions for
7-27-09
9
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 'a
20
21
22
23
24
2 `~
him, maybe he could come up and speak to you about the
agreement. I did provide each of you with a copy of the
agreement which would have to be signed. I did run it by Rex
Emerson to make sure that everything was kosher and okay, and
he is in agreement with the -- with the lease agreement. So,
Mr. Watson, do you want to come up here and maybe speak a
little bit about the specifics of it?
MR. WATSON: Thank y'all. We were just contacted
-- Terry contacted me --
JUDGE TINLEY: If you'd be kind enough to tell us
who you are and where you're from so we could have that in
the record?
MR. WATSON: Okay, I'm sorry. Steve Watson. I'm
Senior Vice President/C.F.O. for Security State Bank. We
have one of our branches here in Fredericksburg, and we're
headquartered -- here in Kerrville; we're headquartered out
of Fredericksburg. Terry had contacted me some time ago
about the possibility of us putting an ATM here in the
courthouse. They'd been to some seminar or something, and I
think it was something that was suggested that they go back
to their local counties and see what the possibility was of
having that done. We were glad to check into it. We did.
We've just had one extended -- it's not at our branch
locations -- at one place, and checked to see what was
involved with it. We would take all the expense, with the
7-27-09
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
la
20
2 :1
22
23
24
25
exception of the electricity; the County would be out the
electricity. We'd take the phone line expense and the
installation and -- and everything involved with installing
it here in the courthouse. Be set up in the location where
she described. It's very satisfactory. You have plenty of
security there. The doors are locked when you're not open.
Appears there's two cameras there that are positioned real
well. If somebody used it and said they didn't use it, we
could get a pretty good picture of who it was that used the
ATM card. And it would be available to anybody with an ATM
card, debit card, for cash withdrawals.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You say you need a phone
line?
MR. WATSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What kind of a phone? It has
to be a hard line?
MR. WATSON: Yes, sir, it would be an analog line.
We'll -- we would have it set up for dial-up until we can see
what kind of activity's involved on the machine. If the
activity warranted it, we'd have a continuous line on the
thing. But it would basically be a long-distance call which
we would pay for as it's used.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The -- Terry, have either you
or Mr. Watson talked with Mr. Trolinger?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He's out of town.
~-2~-oa
1
3
5
n
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Out of town. And the reason
is, phone lines are very difficult to come by in the
courthouse because of the number of available lines.
MR. WATSON: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I'm not sure if we can
easily -- or --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't think there is one.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't know if there's an
available line. May be hard to find, and I'm not sure they
can bring in just a line.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it would be an
off-system line, wouldn't be part of the main system. It
would be a dedicated line for that ATM.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They could bring in another
line with the cable size and such? Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Lyle, if you would just
take a minute and explain so the public can hear what you
believe is the reason for placing an ATM --
MS. LYLE: The reason for placing the ATM, I
visited with several offices within the courthouse, and
they're all in agreement with me, in that it's convenience.
We have a couple come in, let's say, to pay their taxes, and
they're $200 short. "Let me go to the bank and get the
money." Well, there's an ATM right outside the door; you can
go get the cash from there. I don't know about you, but if
7-27-09
1
?_
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12
somebody told me I had to come back with more money, I
probably wouldn't come back the same day. I had intended to
come to the courthouse to make my payment. I can't make it;
I have to go get money, come back to the courthouse again. I
probably would not come back again. And several offices have
-- have told me the exact same thing. People say they're
going to go to the bank, get the money and come back. They
never come back, at least not for two, three days.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And it particularly
benefits your court collections?
MS. LYLE: It would benefit my office, in addition.
Court days for Jannett, she would take cash. Any other days,
she would not take cash, but on court days she would take
cash. And so people having to pay their court costs that
day, in lieu of having to send them to the bank, they could
go get the money from the ATM and come right back and pay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There's --
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Pieper, you had a question or
comment?
MS. PIEPER: Yes, sir. That was years ago that we
made a statement of no cash -- of no checks or whatever, cash
only or whatever on court days. But we've been taking credit
cards now for a good while, all three of our offices,
district court, tax. So, I would prefer not to accept cash
7-27-09
13
1

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
21
22
23
24
25
because of all the bookkeeping involved and all the handling
of the cash. I would prefer to keep my credit card system
your credit card system, would it?
MS. PIEPER: No, but if somebody would -- would go
out and take -- swipe their ATM debit/credit card, whatever,
I prefer them to do it in my office, because I don't want
cash. I would prefer their credit card in my office.
JUDGE TINLEY: If they would otherwise use that
same card for the purpose of going to the ATM machine,
wouldn't your people have the option to say, "We'll accept
your credit card without you having to go to the ATM
I machine"?
MS. PIEPER: Oh, yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. PIEPER: We have signs up, but, you know, if
somebody comes directly out of court and goes directly to
the -- to an ATM machine once they get assigned a fine and
court cost, they may not realize it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just see this thing as a
convenient service to the taxpayers. I mean, that's bottom
line to the thing. And it enhances her department, and I
guess others. I don't know about others, but I know that
there are times when people come in to make payments to her,
7-27-09
1
:Z
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1a
20
2 :1
2 '~
23
24
25
14
"There's a credit card machine out there; go out there and
get some cash and give it to me."
MS. PIEPER: They don't make payments in her
office.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Ms. Clerk.
MS. PIEPER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm well aware of that, but
I think it's a service to the taxpayers.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis, you had a comment?
MS. HARGIS: Cash is a problem. We're trying to
get away from cash. All courthouses are trying to get away
from cash because of the possibility of fraud. Also, having
a lot of cash in the building is a problem. That means we
have to have a clerk who has to take that cash to the bank
every day, because we have more cash. I think Jannett's
office and Linda's office as well, and I think even Diane's
office would prefer the credit cards over the cash, because
it's -- it -- you know, it's just more of a problem. It
opens up more fraud. It's just mostly auditors --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Opens up more fraud? We
have some fraud here?
MS. HARGIS: No, it's -- the possibility with cash
is there. And that is the -- that's the reason why we've
gone away from the cash. And it's -- you know, it's just not
7-27-09
1
:?
3
,~
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
2 :1
22
23
24
25
15
a preferable system because of the problems in having to have
a clerk take cash. There's more liability involved with that
person being -- you know, with the money bag. And, you know,
I -- I just prefer that we don't have that much cash in the
building. I mean, we've gotten away from it, and -- and
that's the reason why we've gotten away from it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a question. It's
probably a pretty stupid question to most people in the
audience, but I frequently have those. What is the
difference between using a debit card -- I mean, can't -- if
they -- if you have a credit card swipe machine, doesn't that
-- isn't that the same as an ATM from the standpoint of -- of
cash to somebody, really? I mean, if they're going to be
paying with a debit card, which is the same as an ATM card,
sort of --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: ATM card. It seems it's the
same thing.
MR. WATSON: Y'all are set up -- if y'all are
handling credit card sales, the County would be set up as a
merchant through some process, and I would imagine y'all are
paying some discount, whatever that might be, for those
charges, and that's an expense to the County. A debit card
is different from a -- a credit card in that that cash has to
be in that account at the bank, so when they swipe it, it's
7-27-09
16
1

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1~
20
21
2?_
23
24
25
running out there to the bank, seeing there's cash there, and
coming back. You can swipe a debit card on a credit card
terminal and use it as what they call a point of sale
transaction, and that can be used on a credit card merchant
terminal one of two ways, as a credit transaction, which
you're paying your -- your fee there, or a point of sale,
where they have to enter their pin number for it to be
transmitted.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Pieper, what is -- is there not
a mark-up to the -- to the citizen if they use a credit card?
MS. PIEPER: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: You charge a mark-up fee?
MS. PIEPER: There's a convenience fee.
JUDGE TINLEY: A convenience fee, okay.
MS. PIEPER: Therefore, there's no cost to the
County to have the credit or debit card, but there is a
convenience fee to the -- to the user, the cardholder.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And how much is that?
MS. PIEPER: It depends on the amount of the --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. How about $150? What would
the mark-up be?
MS. PIEPER: Cheryl, can you answer that?
MS. THOMPSON: I don't know.
JUDGE TINLEY: What's if it's 500? What would the
7-27-09
17
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
21
2?_
23
24
25
MS. PIEPER: Well, right off, I couldn't tell you.
MS. UECKER: It doesn't show on our system. It
just shows on -- when the statement comes through on the
users. It doesn't show us how much of that they're charged
for the user fee.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. I guess my point is, it
occurs to me that we're here to serve the public, not to
serve ourselves. And while it may be more convenient for us
and cause less hassle for us to not have the public have this
convenience, we work for them. Whatever's best for them, I
think, is what we want to do, isn't it? They're going to pay
a mark-up to be able to use their credit card. If they pay
you in cash, there's no mark-up.
MS. HARGIS: Judge, there is. If they don't use
Security State Bank, if they're not a Security State Bank
account holder, they will pay at that ATM on their account.
MR. WATSON: There's a surcharge of $2.50 for a
noncustomer, yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: I understand. But that's the
customer's election at that point. That's the citizen's
I election.
MS. PIEPER: At either point when they come in with
a credit card, ours will show what the convenience fee is,
and we -- we have them acknowledge that that's okay or not.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, of course. They don't have
7-27-09
18
1
:?
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1a
20
2 :1
22
23
24
25
much choice at that point, though, do they?
MS. PIEPER: Yes. If they choose not to do it,
then that's fine. That's -- we void it out.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And they could walk out in
the lobby and use the ATM and avoid it, could they not?
MS. PIEPER: Well, they can go out and pay the fee
on the ATM machine. It's whatever they choose.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who bears the cost of the
telephone line?
MR. WATSON: We would.
JUDGE TINLEY: They do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think there's a -- I mean,
seems like there's two issues here. One's a policy issue as
to accepting cash. If we're accepting cash, then I think
it's the next step on the ATM. If we're not going to accept
cash, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have an ATM.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I didn't hear anybody say
we have a policy not to accept cash. I just heard an
expression they prefer not to.
JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think we can refuse to
accept cash.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't either. I don't
I either.
JUDGE TINLEY: If a citizen wants to take care of
7-27-09
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 :1
22
an obligation they have, I think if they tender cash, we're
obliged to take it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Without any mark-up.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Uecker, you had a comment?
MS. UECKER: You know, I just want to say I don't
-- I don't have a problem with the ATM machine at all. And I
don't -- I'd probably use it personally. But, you know, I
take checks, I take money orders, I take -- definitely take
cash. We take whatever we can get. In God we trust; all
others pay cash. (Laughter.) And just the point, you know,
we take a lot of money from felons. I've never once had a
returned check on a criminal or on a felon. Most of the
returned checks come from lawyers. (Laughter.) So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Whoa.
23
24
25 approva
7-27-09
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
MS. UECKER: I've never had a returned check, and I
will -- I will continue to take cash.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On that happy note, I think
-- I think it's worth a try. If we don't like it, we can
always do something about it, and I move approval of the
agenda item.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
l~
20
21
22
23
24
25
20
on that motion?
MR. EMERSON: I did. And, in fact, that's the
revised version of the contract.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank you,
sir. Thank you, Ms. Lyle.
MS. LYLE: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to our 9:15 item, if we
might, a presentation by Margie Jetton, Better Consumer
Choices, Guardian Vendor Management program. Ms. Jetton?
MS. JETTON: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Morning.
MS. JETTON: Thank you. And, Mr. Letz, I'm sorry;
you're the only one that I didn't get to meet with, and I
hope you got my message. I did not mean to stand you up.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, I did get your message.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
la
20
21
22
23
24
25
21
MS. JETTON: Okay, good. You've got in front of
you the Guardian Vendor Management packet. Basically, it's
something that has to do -- well, I made it through Better
Consumer Choices, because we were already in sort of the
security realm anyway. What it is, is that we make sure that
the vendors that come into a place, like a hospital or the
County or a bank, or anyplace that has any sensitive data or
patients or vulnerable people, we make sure that not only the
company, the vendor that's coming in -- let's say the
plumber, electrician, the A/C people -- that not only that
company is liable, but the employees that are entering the
premises also have been thoroughly checked out using our
system, which is quite a bit more intense than the state,
because the state only checks D.P.S. records. We check the
four national databases that work independently of each
other. We check the federal prison records. We probably do
many of the things that Rusty does when he checks people
coming into his facilities, and they are also then given
photo ID's that anyone can see that has the expiration date
of that background check, so that we continue to monitor it
and make sure. And it costs the County nothing. All I'm
asking is that when you consider hiring vendors that are not
a bid process item, that are below -- I believe someone told
me it's now $50,000 instead of $25,000? That you think about
using an extra level of security and using businesses that
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
l~
20
21
22
23
24
25
22
are approved by Better Consumer Choices on the Guardian plan.
Questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Any expense to the County?
MS. JETTON: None. This is vendor-sponsored. Our
members pay us a monthly fee, and they use our web site to
prescreen their employees. Like, for example, Schreiner
University already uses our web site to prescreen their own
employees, so just -- all I'm asking is that when the
departments are thinking about it, give us -- just consider
it. Our vendors are on the web sites, and --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is something that's just a
-- if we choose to do it one time, we -- next time, we --
MS. JETTON: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Might be a different situation?
MS. JETTON: Of course.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 'Cause you wouldn't
necessarily, probably, need some of the established vendors
that we have, that we've done business with that may not
subscribe to your service. That wouldn't stop us from using
them.
MS. JETTON: That wouldn't stop you from using
them. It is something -- if you want to nominate a business
to be with us, we do go to them and explain how it works,
because there are some companies that do not want us to check
their employees, and there's sometimes reasons for that. I
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1~
20
21
22
23
24
25
23
have found in the last eight years that some people that said
that they did background checks, even here locally -- and I'm
not going to name any names. I said, "Well, that's great.
What are you already doing?" And they said, "We do
face-to-face interviews." And I said, "Really?" And then
I've had the instance where they only use -- I would say,
"What kind of background checks do you do?" And they go,
"$6.95." And I go, "What?" And they said, "Well, $6.95."
And I said, "What do you mean?" We go -- they do the online.
And a lot of even home health care agencies use that. And
they had no idea what they were actually getting for the
6.95. Most of the time it was just checking with the D.P.S.,
and if you do that, you're not going to catch a murderer from
Oklahoma. You're only going to check -- check things that
have happened here in Texas, and that's it. Any questions?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is part of your business with
the vendors -- I didn't know these questions to ask on the
day that I met with you, but do the vendors that subscribe to
your program, does it give them, I guess -- I guess it does
in some way give them an advantage because of the background
checks, but also is there advertising of those companies done
through your company?
MS. JETTON: On the -- is the advertising done
through our company? I don't think of us as doing
advertising, but yes, there's testimonials on the last page
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 "1
22
23
24
2 `i
24
in your packet of some vendors locally that have come
forward. Has it increased their business? Definitely. Sure
it has. Because most people, even noncommercial, but
residents, would rather go to a list that they knew was safe
rather than just go to a phone book or something like that,
and that proves nothing of the individual. So, has it helped
the vendors? Sure, of course it has. Do we think of ourself
as advertising? No. We think of ourself as a designation
and a destination.
JUDGE TINLEY: I would assume the advertising
component is more what the vendor would do, where they would
advertise that --
MS. JETTON: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- that their business is a member
of, or their employees are checked through, or --
MS. JETTON: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- something to that effect?
MS. JETTON: I'm really excited, because now in San
Antonio I'm starting to see Aramendia trucks and all these
big companies, and they -- our logo's on the side, and all
their employees are wearing our badges, so yeah, it's great.
Okay?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think it's a good service.
It's another firewall of protection for us, the way I see it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Doesn't require anything of
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 'a
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
us, right?
MS. JETTON: Hmm-mm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am.
MS. JETTON: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you taking the time to be
here.
MS. JETTON: Appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go now to our 9:30 item, Item
Number 5, a presentation on the proposed new library facility
and campus. Mr. Lewis is here.
MR. LEWIS: What do I do, step over here to the
controls?
JUDGE TINLEY: Sure.
MS. MABRY: You can move it.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. LEWIS: I can speak from here if everybody can
I hear me. Does that work?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure, fine by me.
MR. LEWIS: Let me do that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That way we can watch what
you're doing.
MR. LEWIS: Do you want to read it for me? What
are my controls, someone? And then we'll start.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
7-27-09
26
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 `,~
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. MABRY: Just advance that way.
MR. LEWIS: Does this do it?
MS. MABRY: This is the back button, back and
forward.
MS. HARGIS: Tess, why don't you run it for him?
MR. LEWIS: All right. I'll go back to the podium.
Good morning, Judge, Commissioners. Thank you for the
opportunity to be here this morning. I'm here on behalf of a
bunch of folks. I do have with me this morning Kaye Lenox,
who is the president of and C.E.O. of the San Antonio Public
Library Foundation, who's been one of our leaders and an
inspiration to us. On behalf of all the rest of planning, I
want to thank you. I'm here to present a new vision for the
Butt-Holdsworth Library. Would you go back to the very first
slide? Thank you. Just hold onto that. A lot of time and
thought has gone into this plan, and many, many dedicated
people have collaborated to make it possible. In addition to
all the citizens who participated in surveys about the
library, we give a special thanks to Mr. Charles Butt for his
generous gift that made this master plan possible.
For those that don't know, Mr. Butt pledged a
million dollars over a four-year period to the -- for the
improvement of the library building, as well as paying for
the -- all of the preliminary design work that we
participated in. Our design team was comprised of Kaye
7-27-09
27
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1a
20
21
22
23
24
25
Lenox, Jill Giles with Giles Design in San Antonio, William
Reynolds, Senior Vice President with H.E.B.'s Facility
Alliance, and myself. Our leadership team was comprised of
Mayor Bock, County Judge Pat Tinley, Councilman Scott Gross,
Greg Nichols with H.E.B., Victoria Wilson, who is our
development leader, Brian Bondy, Guy Overby and Joe Herring,
Dr. Huddleston and the Friends of the Library and the Library
Advisory Board. I didn't want to forget anybody.
In a paper entitled, "The Importance of Public
Libraries" prepared for the city of Kerrville by Providence
Associates, it stated the world of the public library is
changing as the needs and expectations of communities change.
Today's public libraries must anticipate and respond to
changing demographics that include more culturally and
ethnically diverse communities, increased number of senior
citizens, more families with young children living in the
urban environments, et cetera. A compelling number of
national studies conclude that libraries are an important
part of the social and cultural fabric of communities. And
among the new roles libraries are assuming is the role of
library as community center. Furthermore, three recent
studies address the economic impact of libraries on
communities, concluding that public libraries are important
elements of a community's economic development.
And it was perhaps with this in mind that Charles
7-27-09
28
:1
:?
3
,~
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 `~
20
21
22
23
24
25
Butt contacted Kaye Lenox in early 2008 expressing his
concerns about the future of our library, which was built in
1967. Kaye had been involved with the very successful
reimagining of several libraries in the San Antonio area,
including the Tobin and Landa Branch libraries. Both
projects included the rehabilitation and creative reuse of
existing library space, incorporation of current technology,
and information management systems and the redevelopment of
their site surrounds to create a community-friendly,
'~, park-like campus setting. As we began to focus on what this
meant to our library, we realized that our site has all of
these opportunities, but it also has something that no others
do, and that is 400 feet of beautiful Guadalupe riverfront.
When you view you the library from the air, which most of us
can't do, you're immediately struck by the beauty and power
of its setting. It is an urban site perched on the edge of
our wonderful river, with direct access to Tranquility Park,
Tranquility Island, Louise Hays Park. Now, on the Water
Street side, it's a quick walk to the downtown area, the
courthouse, shops, banks, restaurants. And this, coupled
with the unique architecture of the library and the history
of the building, was all we needed to begin.
The scope of our work included several things,
including review of previous studies and recommendations,
2008 City of Kerrville Municipal Facilities Master Plan, and
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
21
22
23
24
25
29
the Providence Group study which I referenced. We conducted
facility surveys and documentation, which means we drew up
all of the existing additions, we made site visits to our
', libraries in San Antonio, specifically the Landa campus, and
I'~, the Judge was able to join us on one of those. We had
meetings and discussions with all the various stakeholder
groups, staff advisory board, Friends of the Library, others,
and finally we began our campus master planning. Next slide.
This is the existing site. We've got -- there are
four buildings; the library itself, which faces Water Street,
with a service entrance on the back side. Currently there
are 72 parking spaces on the site. The building in the
middle that says "existing building" -- I have a pointer, but
it doesn't seem to work on your screen, so I'm just going to
', talk. 433 Water Street, the building in the middle, the --
the Kerr County History Center on the far right-hand side,
and then the annex or the little carriage house in the back
behind the history center. There are a number of
substantial -- thank you -- number of substantial existing
trees. There is a little Treaty Oak, which came from an
acorn that came from Treaty Oak in Austin, the Davy Crockett
Oak planted by Ladybird when the library was dedicated in
I! 1967; it sits in the middle of the property along the river's
edge, and a variety of other mature pecan trees and oak
trees. And then scattered throughout the trees are tiles
7-27-09
30
:1
2
3
~~
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
with quotes. The quotes are from classic contemporary
literature, which is one of Mrs. Butt's hallmark signatures.
If you've been to H.E.B. Foundation, the Laity Lodge campus,
they have these on those sites as well. Next slide.
As we began to look at the site, it was our goal to
create a substantial design weaving newly shaped space into
the fabric of the existing campus, and thus respecting the
history of the place while making room for the future. First
thing you'll notice is that in the middle of the site, the
433 Water Street is gone. We attempted -- we looked at a lot
of ways to try and use the building, and the age and
condition and the placement of the building sort of preempted
that. Access is still going to be off of Water Street.
Vehicle access from Water Street, pedestrian access from
Tranquility Park. We still have two curb cuts, but we
redesigned the parking. The site will be graded down to
provide more gentle transitions from Water Street down to the
river's edge. Existing trees and landscape are maintained,
and new sustainable low-maintenance, drought-tolerant
landscaping will be envisioned. We will provide space for
community gardens. We do have -- in this new plan, we have
72 designated parking spaces, so we have provided a
comparable number as exist today.
We propose a pedestrian crossing down by the bottom
left here -- keep going down, down, down. Right over to your
7-27-09
.L
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
31
right there. That would be a signalized crossing. We're
also in conversation with the City Engineer about maybe doing
a signalized intersection at Quinlan Street. The library
front door faces -- still faces Water Street, but when we see
the plans in a minute, you'll see we've sort of reengineered
how you approach that, and in the back we've provided a
playground adjacent to the amphitheater that existed and has
been in use since the library was built. And then across the
back, we show some things that might take place along the
river's edge; perhaps boardwalk, pavilions, some things to
tie into the river trail system as that grows. I'll come
back to the library main building in a minute.
Generally, we are proposing improvements to all of
the buildings on the campus, and with respect to the site
with the history center, we have brought parking closer to
the front door. There's a -- there's a wheelchair ramp there
now. We would make it just more accessible and more usable,
and then provide access to the annex in the back. And the --
that is a space that will be dedicated and used by the
Friends of the Library for their book sale and their ongoing
operations. As we begin to -- begin to look at the library
building -- go to the next slide, please. This is that --
just the existing floor plan entrance on the -- main entrance
on the bottom side, covered, but outside exterior balcony on
the top part. You go up -- over to your left a little. Keep
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 `~
20
21
22
23
24
25
32
going. Keep going. One more. That's all right. Everyone
here is familiar with the library.
Primary consideration was given to preservation of
the library shell and structure. We didn't want to build
outside of the existing structure, but we do propose
enhancements to protect the existing building; a new roof,
increased insulation. We propose to replace all the doors
and windows, put insulating units in, like not unlike what
the County is doing with the courthouse building now. New
~I interior and exterior lighting, more efficient lighting,
', energy efficient, and as well as providing better lighting
levels, new air conditioning and heating systems, and
reallocated items. Based on previous studies that were
', done -- and there were a number; there have been three major
ones that have been done over the last ten years -- the
needs, the wish list, included technology integration, with
i
WiFi campus-wide, so that -- and you can go to the next
~ slide, if you'd like.
Additional square footage for materials and
programming, designated spaces for children, teen, and youth
programming, staff usability and functionality,
accessibility, meeting rooms available after hours for
I~ community use, sensitivity to the historic values of the
library, and input from various stakeholders, including
library staff, Friends group, Library Board, staff, et
7-27-09
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
33
Water Street, but we've reconfigured it so you enter directly
into it. Instead of coming from the sides, we've got a
wheelchair ramp that curves along the -- the side of the
building. It will bring people in from the parking spaces.
We have provided bike parking. Our service entrance is still
on the lower level.
We have not really -- we haven't planned all of the
interior. What we have done is -- our charge was to find
space on all -- all levels. We have captured space that is
inside the perimeter of the -- the limits of the library
walls without adding to it. We've increased the usable
air-conditioned area by about 15 percent, without adding --
without expanding the building footprint. And, so, on the
first floor, we have enclosed -- we propose to enclose the
balcony, and you can see on this slide that it is identified
as a children's area, open up the rotunda to -- and bring the
reference desk down in the center. Then you'll see from left
to right, kind of bottom, 7 o'clock, reference, computer,
youth, children.
Currently, the restrooms on the main floor are
separated. The men's are over on the bottom left; the
women's are up top right by the stairs. We propose to
consolidate those, for functionality as well as for security.
That continues to be an issue. Next slide. The mezzanine as
~-2~-oa
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it exists today. Next slide. And then we had proposed to
enclose the mezzanine level as well, that -- as above the
exterior balcony, adding to that increase in space. And,
again, just identifying spaces for use up here, we have
reading areas, stack space, some conference area, all within
the footprint of the existing building. Next slide, please.
There's our bottom level. On the bottom, the
bottom half of that is all maintenance and the Friends of the
Library; it's mechanical space. There's a computer -- the
server for the library is there, and the Friends of the
Library occupy the center section of it, and they operate
their book sale out of that space. Between 9 o'clock and
12 o'clock is the meeting room. You enter it from -- either
through the loading dock area or from the doors up there
around 10, 11 o'clock, if they -- if they're open. And then
there's quite a bit of loading dock area down there. There
is a small kitchen and men's and women's restroom. Next
slide, please. And what we -- the studies asked for
additional program space or additional staff space,
additional meeting room, and so that is what we will propose
here. We have captured space that is generally unused over
by the loading dock, limited the loading dock to -- thank
you -- limited the loading dock to just enough area for
trucks to back into, load and unload books and other
supplies. And then, say, on the bottom half, we have --
7-27-09
35
"1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
21
22
23
24
25
because we propose -- the Friends propose to move to the
annex carriage house, free up space for technical services,
which will be staff functions and allowing more of the space
We've got three community rooms here, one in the
center and two off on the edge that face the amphitheater, a
kitchen that serves both inside functions and outside
functions. We have consolidated the men's and women's
restroom, and also increased the fixture count to make it
more usable, and then created a nice -- an entry vestibule
down there. That's space -- if you've ever been down on that
lower level of the library, it's kind of forbidding; it's
really not easy to figure out how to get in, so we've created
some vestibule entries. It's made it a place that you'd want
to meet, with elevator access between all floors, as well as
grade level access. And there's an existing elevator that is
out of commission right now that we will propose down right
there for the staff, and that will be staff-only for getting
books up and down from the second -- between the first,
second, and mezzanine. Next slide, please.
Ili And then in the interior of the library, one of the
I things that we thought a lot about was this large space.
That's a grand space when you back into the rotunda, but
volume is kind of overwhelming, and the lighting is not
adequate. There's fluorescent light fixtures on the ceiling,
7-27-09
.l
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
36
and they're 20-something feet up in the air, 30 feet up in
the air. So, we propose to build a reference desk down in
the center of the rotunda and drop a canopy over it that
would have lighting, as well as give it a little more human
scale. That would be a reference desk; it would be
information, and as well as, because of its location, would
have access to all points of the main level and the upper
level, and just something to modify that space. And we have
proposed some suspended fixtures that would provide both up
lighting, down lighting, and then in other areas around the
library we would again propose new lighting, better, more
efficient lighting, better task lighting that would be
appropriate to all the different uses.
From the outside -- this would be a view, again,
from the air above Water Street. We don't -- we don't
propose additions -- major additions to the exterior of the
library itself. At the main entries and lower -- at the
Water Street entry and down at the lower level on the lower
part of the campus, we would add some shade trellises at the
main entries to identify those as entries, as well as provide
a little protection as you come into the building. And,
finally -- next slide -- and then the same view back down
from the -- this lower -- lower campus area. You'd be
looking out over our playground, and you can kind of see
them. We propose a shade structure above the amphitheater
7-27-09
37
L
,,
3
,~
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
walls. What you're seeing there is, you're seeing glass all
on this back wall, so it's -- instead of looking at
balcony -- you know, exterior balcony, you'd see enclosed
space that would be given over to programs -- program space.
And that is -- that is our vision for the library. It's one
that we, as a team, believe in. We're proud of it, and we
humbly present it to you. And that's my story, and I'll
entertain any questions.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just -- I just have one
question, Peter. On the -- in the site plan, is it felt that
the addition of 15 percent additional space in the library is
sufficient for a library in a community of this type? Is
that a large enough building, long-term?
MR. LEWIS: We believe it is, and that's -- we
had -- Ms. Lenox and Jill Giles both have experience in
libraries, more than we do, so we -- we did our studies and
we brought in folks who know more than we do. And we felt
that with a realignment, reconfiguration of spaces,
reallocation -- for instance, the Friends of the Library,
there's very inefficient use of the lower level, and we're
going to put them in a space where they can more efficiently
conduct their sales. So, we've not only added that
15 percent, but we -- with the sort of reorganization of
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
2 ()
21
22
23
24
25
38
spaces, we -- we believe and are convinced that it would
create a more efficient use. And, in fact, it's very
sufficient for on into the future.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Excellent.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions? Comments?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: History Center. Are there any
~ renovations going on there?
MR. LEWIS: Yeah, and I've been -- I didn't mean to
slight the History Center. We're proposing that the second
floor would be finished out, as it currently is, not the
ground floor, so that an elevator cab would be installed in
that shaft that is there now, that shaft back there, and a
machine room for it, and then general cosmetic upgrades. The
work that was done there was done ten years ago now, so it's
really time to go back in and clean the brick up. But the
intent would be that you'd have a like-new campus when all of
this is done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Carriage house requires
some renovation?
MR. LEWIS: Carriage house -- it does, and
additions to it as well to accommodate the Friends program
needs. And not only would the Friends use it, but it would
be a hospitality place that would open out on the -- onto the
lawn across the river's edge there. So -- and the Friends
would participate. They're committed about it, and we're
7-27-09
1
.~
3
.~
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
39
discussing how all that can take place.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The amphitheater that you
referenced, that opens up to the Tranquility Park or opens up
to the Water Street side?
MR. LEWIS: It opens up to the library itself. In
fact, it is the -- there's -- it's stair steps back there.
They are there now. They were built originally as part of
the library, and they face the back -- they face that
community meeting room.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. LEWIS: The kids use it a lot. My kids kind of
grew up there. They did summer reading programs, and they
gather out there, they hear stories, they get awards. It's a
neat, neat place. It's got all these tiles in there that the
Friends and Mrs. --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I recall.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? Ms. Lenox, did you
have anything you wanted to offer?
MS. LENOX: No, I just want you to know it's been a
privilege to work on this vision, and you have a wonderful
library and a wonderful team. So, I appreciate it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Ms. Roberts? Any
comment? I don't mean to put you on the spot.
MS. WILSON: Which last name are you going to use?
Well, I'm excited to be back involved in the library again.
7-27-09
40
1

3
4
5
6
.~
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
This is just really exciting for me, and I think it's a
wonderful plan. And I appreciate your comments about the --
the growth, because we were always -- about the -- like, the
17 percent increase in the space, and would that be adequate.
But I think that if you consider what's happening in
libraries, it's much more -- you know, you can think of it as
a digitization of the print record. Well, then you have a
digitization, almost, metaphorically, of the library
building. But 17 percent space in a building that size is a
lot, and I think it's -- and it's -- the way the designers
have worked it out, it's going to be much more efficiently
used, so I think it's a good plan. And it's -- the
difficulty is, who wants to raise money in this environment?
So -- but, you know, when you have a good product, it's a
pleasure to raise money for it. So that's -- we're real
excited, and appreciate your listening to our dream and our
vision, 'cause I know it's yours too. Thanks.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
MR. LEWIS: That's it. Thank you much. Appreciate
it.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate you bringing that to
us. Thank you very much.
MR. LEWIS: My pleasure.
7-27-09
41
:L
,~
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 move on to Item 4 -- excuse
me, Item 2 on our agenda. Acknowledge receipt of the
quarterly investment report from Patterson and Associates for
the quarter ending June 30th, 2009. Ms. Williams, we only
need to acknowledge receipt of that report?
MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's move
to Item 4 on the agenda; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to adopt rules for Flat Rock Lake Park
requiring all animals to be on a leash at all times, and not
I, restrict them to any particular area of the park. Ms. Whitt?
MS. WHITT: Good morning. Well, here we are again.
It's been a couple weeks since we were last here discussing
the same issue, and nothing's changed. Last week Marc Allen
and myself were out there again. We continue to have
complaints out there. But we were out there, and B.J. was
out there with his trustees. Maintenance was out there
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
42
cutting down a tree that had fallen over, along with Road and
Bridge. And while we were out there, we were patrolling the
area, and, of course, saw a yellow lab way down at the other
end of the park. So we stopped and spoke to the owner of the
lab, and, of course, all we get is arguments, saying that
their dogs aren't hurting anyone or anything. But, there
again, the animals are not under their direct control. So I
explained to this person that we were going to start issuing
citations. Before this happened, we did go to Rex and asked
Rex for the definition of "direct control." He printed out
copies. I handed this -- this person a copy of that, and as
we're leaving, his dog chases our truck.
I did get this on videotape; however, John is not
available to -- John was not available to install the
software needed to -- to download this video and copy it.
But B.J. from the Sheriff's Department and the maintenance
guys did witness this. As we stopped and spoke with B.J.,
the trustees were out working, and the dogs were out, you
know, messing around with them. As these guys are working,
you have dogs going up to them. You have dogs running up to
people that are just simply out there walking, exercising. I
counted 15 people that day, and out of those 15 people, there
was only two people that picked up their dog's droppings.
This continues to be a problem, and I don't see that we're
going to solve this problem unless we require them to be on a
7-27-09
43
1
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 `~
20
21
22
23
24
25
leash. I don't think we ought to restrict them to -- to any
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't -- I mean, as you know,
I haven't been really a big fan of putting them -- or
changing the policy there. Putting them on a leash isn't
going to solve the second problem. I mean --
MS. WHITT: The dog poo?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
MS. WHITT: Well, sure. Sure. And that may be
true, but that -- honestly, that's not as much my concern as
the public safety. In my opinion, that's a big issue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think last time, the
I Court's action kind of foundered on the fact that we -- the
proposal was to require animals to be on leash all over the
park, and I think there may be some ability to compromise
that. I would like to make this comment, however, though.
We're trying to do some improvements to what I call the lower
section of the park, the original park, which would include
', picnic tables and benches and things of that nature. I think
', the public is better served if the animals that are brought
to the park in that particular section are on leash. I
understand there is a strong sentiment to have animals have
an area of the park that -- where they can run loose, and my
suggestion would be that we give it a try for what I call the
~-2~-09
44
1
:?
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
21
22
23
24
25
upper section, that section east of the bridge, and restrict
that to animals off leash. And the lower section, or the
larger section, to have animals on leash. That would be what
I think would be a reasonable compromise.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You don't restrict -- that just
means that they can be off leash in that upper -- the east
end of the park?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They can be taken up there
and be off leash.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Open to everybody?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, absolutely.
Absolutely.
MS. WHITT: But is that going to solve the problem?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know.
MS. WHITT: Or are we going to continue to have
arguments when we go out there and we issue someone a
citation for their dog not being under their direct control?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, that's -- that's a
possibility.
MS. WHITT: We have a job to do, and, I mean, I
can't -- it's very difficult for us to do our job when all we
get is arguments. And, I mean, we're going to end up
spending most of our time in court arguing these cases.
COMMISSIONER	WILLIAMS:	If we were	to open	up	the
eastern park, the newer	section -	- the upper	section,	as	I
7-27-09
:L
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 `7
18
1a
20
21
22
23
24
25
45
call it -	- and allow	animals	to	be off	leash	up there,	that's
-- that's	a smaller	section	of	park.	And if	they're -	- if
they're confined to that area, would it not help your -- your
ability to enforce park regulations by having them there, as
opposed to having them all over the park?
MS. WHITT: No, not really. In my opinion, I don't
think we're going to solve anything by doing that. The dogs
are still going to -- I don't see how that's going to solve
any problems.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, one thing, Janie, it
will do is, most -- from what I know about the area, the boat
ramp area, what Bill's calling the lower area, I believe --
is that correct? That area is more used by people just that
', don't have dogs. And -- and it's also a real nice area for
people to walk dogs in and turn them loose. But I'm not an
advocate of letting that area be, you know, off-leash area.
I think we try it. If we can try it that way and do -- do
that part of the park, they got to be on -- on a leash. If
they're not on a leash, you need to pick them up, take them
to the shelter. Bottom line, just pick them up. The dog
that chased your truck, you should have loaded him up, taken
him to the shop. Let them come get him. If he was under
their control, he wouldn't be following your truck. Open the
tailgate, jump him in there. You know, I mean, that's the
way you solve that problem. You know, but you've got to
7-27-09
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
start picking up some of those dogs that are running loose
and not under anybody's control. I think, you know, that
area is more used by a larger part of the public.
MS. WHITT: It is.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Multiple things. Fishing,
boating.
MS. WHITT: Walking.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Walking.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Picnics.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Whatever you want to do. It
really is the most used portion. The other end is not -- not
used that much right now. And what I'd like to do is for us
to try it. If it doesn't work, we can always get more
stringent. If people are not going to be responsible, then
we'll take the privilege away.
MS. WHITT: Well, then I'd be willing to try it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's kind of where I --
where I'd like to see us head. Let's try it. If the results
are not satisfactory, you're going to come back and tell us
they're not satisfactory.
MS. WHITT: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's -- I think we ought
to -- just to get people -- I'm sure they'll come back sooner
if it's a real problem, but give it 60 days. Come back with
a report on -- you know, keep records during that time, like
7-27-09
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
I know you do anyway. Just say, you know, this is what's
happened. And we'll make a -- either continue or --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We can give them one more
chance, is the way I look at it.
MS. WHITT: Now, I mean, when we drive out there,
we're -- we're actually being harassed. We've had people
yelling at us. We've had people cuss at us for simply being
out there patrolling.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, call the Sheriff.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can put signage up that
indicates the lower section, or the -- what I call the lower
section, all of that adjacent to the boat ramp, inside the
iron or the post fence, where we're going to put picnic
tables and things of that nature, that section, we'll put
signage up that indicates that dogs off leash are not welcome
there, not -- cannot be in that section of the park.
Anything off leash has to be on the eastern side of the park.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think you should -- on that
sign, I agree with you; we need to have it. We should cite
what the penalty is.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can do that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A misdemeanor, Class C?
MR. EMERSON: Class C.
MS. WHITT: Class C.
25 I COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Class C misdemeanor.
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
48
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Post a fine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Post a fine, and hopefully it
I will work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If we do that, Animal
Control then knows that they can pick up any dogs running
loose in the lower section of the park. Strays, owned by,
whatever.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Doesn't make any difference.
Pick them up.
MS. WHITT: So, on leash in the lower section, off
leash in the upper section.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: East side, the east bridge.
MS. WHITT: When will that be open?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When will it be effective?
If the Court approves it, it will be effective immediately.
MS. WHITT: Right, but when would that be open?
When would the gates be --
MR. BOLLIER: It's open.
MS. WHITT: We were out there last week, and the
~ gate --
MR. BOLLIER: No.
MS. WHITT: -- gate was locked.
AUDIENCE: The gate is locked.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which gate?
MS. WHITT: When you go across the bridge.
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
49
AUDIENCE: Yes.
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, ma'am. That won't never be
MS. WHITT: You have to go -- you have to go
through --
MR. BOLLIER: Go across the bridge. You go across
the bridge, and that's going -- that's a designated parking
spot right there where the cable is, makes a little "L" shape
there. That's a designated parking spot.
MS. WHITT: Okay.
MR. BOLLIER: There is a walk-through gate there
MS. WHITT: Okay.
MR. BOLLIER: And go in there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: From your standpoint, you need
to have a key so you can go through there.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Back gate.
MR. BOLLIER: There's a combination. I'll give you
that.
MS. WHITT: I'll get that from him.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move approval of a
policy for Flat Rock Lake Park that requires animals in what
we define as the lower section to be on leash at all times,
and the upper section east of the -- of Third Creek, animals
can be off leash in that area of the park only.
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1 E3
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
50
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Commissioner, does your motion include off leash,
but still complying with the second part of our Animal
Control order, "supervised by and under the direct control of
the owner"?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, it does.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any question or discussion on
the motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Letz brought up
a time frame to make sure the thing's going to work. Can you
tell me what that is?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think Commissioner Letz
mentioned something like 30 or 60 days. I think 60 days is a
reasonable time to evaluate it, and at the end of 60 days,
Animal Control can come back and tell us their findings.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You'll do that?
MS. WHITT: Yes, sir, I'll do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One other question. The new
property or the upper property, whatever it is you're talking
about, the new one on the far end, when you get down to --
all the way to the other end of the property, there's a fence
line there, and with a -- part of it, a large hole. You can
7-27-09
1
3

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
51
drive a truck through there. What happens -- who's
responsible if Mr. Jones' dog goes into that other property
and kills somebody's sheep?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good question.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The owner.
MS. WHITT: The owner, obviously.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Owner of the animal, I
guess.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there any -- any county
liability in that? I'm still going to vote no.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's no different to me than --
I don't know; you're going to still vote no. There's no
fence at all in Flat Rock where the dogs are now.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been furnished with public
participation forms from a number of individuals. I know
this issue has been discussed at some length. What I would
ask is that -- that if your comments are merely repetitive of
another speaker's comments, that you try not to be
repetitive, but if you have anything additional to add,
certainly, you're free to do that. Initially, I would ask
that -- I received an e-mail from a Maggie Tatum asking me to
read a communication which she sent to me relative to this
issue. I have, in fact, read that communication, and then
she further requested that -- that her communication be
placed with the County Clerk for placement among the record
7-27-09
1
3
.~
5
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 '7
18
19
20
2 "1
22
23
24
52
of these proceedings, and I will do that. But at this time,
MS. ULVESTAD: Ulvestad.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- Ulvestad.
MS. ULVESTAD: Sorry about that.
JUDGE TINLEY: If you -- if you wish, you can come
forward and tell us what's on your mind.
MS. ULVESTAD: I'll just stand up; I won't be long.
I'm a dog walker. I disagree with Ms. Whitt. The vast
majority of us are responsible. We do pick up our dogs'
poop. I have seen one person argue with an Animal Control
officer, and he gave them a hard time, but that individual is
quite elderly, and I believe he suffers from dementia. And
that's the only time I've ever witnessed such a thing.
Anyway, I like the compromises you've suggested, giving us a
new area, or possibly two hours a day in the morning. So,
I -- I'd really appreciate if there could be some compromise
on this.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. Erdmuthe Jackman.
I apologize if I butchered your name, ma'am.
MS. JACKMAN: That's all right. Nobody can
pronounce that word over here. They call me Liz usually.
JUDGE TINLEY: They call you what?
MS. JACKMAN: Liz.
25 ~ JUDGE TINLEY: Liz, okay.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
,~
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 "7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
53
MS. JACKMAN: My second name is Elizabeth, so
usually it's Liz.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, good enough.
MS. JACKMAN: I disagree with this lady, too. I
haven't gone that long, but my neighbor called -- and we live
in the county -- a while back to have a dog picked up that
was stray in our area, but nobody showed up. Now, what am I
supposed to think out there? All of a sudden, our dogs are
terrible? I haven't seen a fight, not that there may not
have been one. I haven't seen one bite, and we know we had a
bite. I just don't quite understand. Do they want to have
less to do? And if the Animal Control man would have a dog
in his cage on the truck and that dog be barking, oh, yes,
other dogs will run after and try to save it. That's
natural, but that's not that you can't call the dog back.
And last time I talked more about my dog. Well, she is a
German shorthair. She is trained for hunting. We had her up
in Kansas. Yes, she's old; she can't do that much, and I'm
-- I don't want to talk about her.
Most other dogs there stay with their owners. If
they're ornery, I have seen many owners take them on a leash
as a punishment. Most people have leashes along. No. I'm a
supporter of the 4-H. Would you close it down because you
have some accidents there? No. Unthinkable. But you want
to close down a dog park. People jog there, and I ask them
7-27-09
1
3
4
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 "7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
54
I
~', all the -- since this came up, if the dogs bother them. One
gentleman was sitting there and eating, and the -- my dogs
are in and out there. I said, "Do they bother you?" "No,
I'm just eating." I called them off. It went fine. And so
most people will do. I wish sometimes one of you could go
out there and watch it in the morning. The dogs interact.
This morning -- my neighbor is gone, and I babysit her dog; I
took it out on a leash. All the other dogs came around. Not
one growled, just sniff, sniff, sniff. What's wrong with
that? And I don't know what this lady has against dogs.
Maybe she should be more involved with dogs.
JUDGE TINLEY: She's pretty involved with them.
MS. WHITT: I'm pretty involved.
MS. JACKMAN: No, with them halfway decent. What
she gets is the strays, the ones that are not cared for, and
they could be dangerous, I admit. But I can't see just --
and if we can't get the upper part, but I don't like to --
for that lady to come up and gripe about us all the time,
when I have gone down there and gone down there and have
enjoyed just watching the dogs interact. And I have gone in
the city park. There the employees come and call my dog and
pet her, because they know her. What a difference between
state -- or county employees and the employees of the city.
Why can't we get along?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We try. All due respect to
7-27-09
55
1 your --
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
1 `7
18
la
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All due respect to your
point of view, part of the problem is the perception that
Flat Rock Lake Park is a dog park. It is not a dog park.
MS. JACKMAN: You shouldn't accept it as that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is a public park.
MS. JACKMAN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we're going to make
certain, or do our level best to make certain that all
segments of the public have the ability to and the right to
enjoy it. That's where we are.
MS. JACKMAN: May I say something?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, absolutely, you may.
MS. JACKMAN: It wouldn't be very nice. It
really -- but since you say to enjoy for everybody, we have
cleaned up and, well, picked up some things that indicates
that that park may be a lover's lane, too. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it happened with Adam
and Eve. I guess it still happens.
MS. JACKMAN: That's right. But nobody complains
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Jackman.
MS. JACKMAN: I mean, it's just --
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Roussel?
about that.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
21
22
23
24
25
56
MS. JACKMAN: -- I don't --
MS. ROUSSEL: I pass.
MS. JACKMAN: -- like to be picked out as the
lady. Thank you.
MS. JACKMAN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Robert Palmer?
MR. PALMER: Thank you. My name's Robert Palmer.
I live at 410 Josephine. Also a dog person. I have some --
a few more questions about the area that y'all have chosen
for us to have off leash. When will you indicate at the park
that that area is to be used for that?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: As soon as we can get the
MR. PALMER: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: If -- if the point of your question
-- when will we indicate that that is to be exclusively for
dogs off leash?
(Mr. Palmer nodded.)
JUDGE TINLEY: If I got anything to say about it,
it will never be indicated that it is exclusively for dogs
off leash.
MR. PALMER: No, but that it's -- no, only that
that's the area that we can take our dogs off leash. Not
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
21
22
23
24
25
57
that it's exclusive, but --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Designated area.
MR. PALMER: -- designated area.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not exclusive area.
MR. PALMER: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Designated. As soon as we
can get the signs up. If the Court approves it, it will be
effective today, and we'll work on the signs immediately and
get them up as quickly as possible.
MR. PALMER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But I bet you spread the
I word.
MR. PALMER: As much as possible. One -- one other
thing I see as a challenge is that there are a lot of
fishermen and people come in from out of town and bring their
dogs, and they're going to be going into the area that's
going to be designated off -- that no dogs be permitted off
leash in that area, so you may have trouble dealing with
those -- with the tourists who come with dogs, and -- and
other people who just come in there to enjoy the park and
also bring their dogs. So --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That may happen, but that's
not a reason not to do what we're proposing.
MR. PALMER: Right. So -- but I'm just saying,
that would be a good heads-up. But one of the things I
7-27-09
58
G~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the newspaper; that was actually a response to y'all's
decision last week to vote down that motion. You know, we
have the toasts and roasts section of the newspaper, and
y'all were in the -- that section last Friday -- not last
Friday, but Friday before that. And there was a toast to the
Kerr County Commissioners for keeping the leash-free option
at Flat Rock Lake Park. Our country needs -- our county
needs a dog park. So, you were appreciated, you know, by the
newspaper for keeping our park, or part of our park now,
leash-free.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I guess that means we'll be
roasted this week, but we've done that before, too.
MR. PALMER: Well, only on -- only a half roast.
Anyway, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to
be heard on this particular item? Give us your name and
address, please, sir.
MR. KALBFLEISCH: Yes. My name is Bill Kalbfleisch
and I live at 505 Loma Vuelta. And I didn't know how famous
I was, because I'm the person, I think, that the lady was
talking about that had dementia. But that's okay. I'm
elderly; I'm 80 years old. And also over here, this lady
with the park service, I was the one that she referred to
that had the discussion. And I have a young lab, and she's
7-27-09
59
1
L
3
~~
5
h
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
being trained. I take her to all the hospitals, and we meet
with the various people, the veterans and so forth. And my
dog is under control with a whistle. I've trained her to
come to me when she hears a certain whistle. I toot two
times and she comes, and so that's the story there. And I
wanted to say, I think that you've done a wonderful job, and
I think it's wonderful that you're having a place we can walk
our dogs. I think you did an excellent job in the compromise
that you came up with.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Anyone else wishing
to be heard? Mr. Dreiss, any comment upon the friendliness
of city employees towards dumb animals? I wanted to give you
the opportunity.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, can I make a quick --
one comment? Before we vote, hopefully. You know, I think
it is interesting that -- I think this Commissioners Court
has done absolutely everything we can to allow a spot in the
county for the public to have -- let dogs be off leash. I've
certainly been a strong supporter of that, and I -- I always
find it interesting that we get criticized for not being nice
or as friendly as the City, whereas the City doesn't allow
anyone to be -- dogs off leash anywhere. So, I mean, I think
that, you know, it should be noted that we certainly have
tried hard here. And if we're trying to enforce the law,
7-27-09
60
.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
well, so be it. I mean, people need to follow the law, and
"under control" means under control. And I support Animal
Control's enforcing that. And I -- you know, the public
needs to understand that. And I think that, you know, if --
if this doesn't work, then I hope the public goes both to the
City and the County and try to get a dog park, because this
is pretty much the last chance.
JUDGE TINLEY: And maybe the newspaper will fund
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe they'll fund it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Animal Control, they've got a
difficult job to do, and they're dealing with something
that's emotional, you know. Either you love animals or you
don't. You're either on one side of the issue or the other.
It's not like many other issues, that there's just a big,
wide spectrum down the middle or whatever. So -- so, what
they deal with are people that feel very, very strongly about
the issue that -- that is under discussion, so they got a
tough job to do, and I think they need to be given some
consideration in that respect. So, any other -- any other
question or discussions on the pending motion? Yes, ma'am?
Come on up. Tell us your name and address, and tell us
what's on your mind, please.
MS. EGLOFF: My name is Sherry Egloff; I live at
j 2042 Summit Crest. I'm a dog walker, and I've been walking
7-27-09
61
.L
,~
~~
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
my dog down there. He's a dachshund, and he has degrees in
obedience, agility, earth dog. He's a very well-trained dog.
Anyway, and I -- I've been walking down there for the past,
I'd say, five winters, and two full years, actually, and my
observation is that I would say 95 percent of all the dogs
down there are well-behaved, under control. There's a few
that probably aren't as perfect as could be, but I could say
that about the people in this room. I could say that about
any group. I would much prefer that your Animal Control
person here catch the dog that is -- you know, if she's a
dogcatcher, catch the dogs that are not obeying the law or
whatever it is we're doing here. But, anyway, and leave the
rest of us alone. I think that it's a valuable thing to all
of us. We walk and talk. We interact as human beings, and
the dogs, it's good for them too. I think it's very
important for dogs to learn to socialize. That eliminates a
lot of animosity in dogs, to have this social interaction,
and I have observed it to be an absolutely wonderful thing,
and would I feel very bad if you didn't allow us to continue.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else?
Anything further on the motion from any of you gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll just make a quick
comment. I'm going to vote against it, because I feel like
the -- that the overall best way to go is the leash law.
That meets the needs of most taxpayers. It meets the needs
7-27-09
62
:1
3
,~
5
E~
7
8
9
10
1 "1
12
13
14
15
15
1 '7
18
1 ')
20
21
22
23
24
25
of our employees that deal with this stuff daily, day in and
day out. And there's nothing wrong with having animals on
the leash. The compromise is that, in my opinion, that we
are giving one segment of society one of the prettiest pieces
of property in Texas. And -- although I want to argue with
Janie a little bit about the dog chasing trucks. That's what
dogs do; they chase trucks and cats, and I'm in favor of
both.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Squirrels.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, and squirrels.
JUDGE TINLEY: And ducks.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ducks. Golly, it just goes
', on and on and on. But I just -- I just think the answer and
the real compromise, and meet everybody's needs, is an
on-leash -- on-leash issue. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other member of the Court have
anything? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(Commissioners Williams, Letz, and Oehler voted in
favor of the motion.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed?
(Commissioner Baldwin voted against the motion.)
~~~ JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We've got a
I
ICI 10:05 item that we have run over. Let me quickly get to
that. I will -- I will recess the Commissioners Court
7-27-09
.L
2
3
4
~~
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 '~
20
21
22
23
24
25
63
meeting, and I will -- I will convene a public hearing with
respect to vacating lot lines on Lots 216 through 222 in
Center Point Estates, Unit II.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed
at 10:20 a.m., and a public hearing was held in
open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public
that wishes to be heard with respect to vacating lots lines
on Lots 216 through 222 in Center Point Estates, Unit II?
You wish to be heard, ma'am?
MS. NICHOLS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Come forward, please. Tell us
what's on your mind about that particular agenda item on
public hearing, Item 13.
MS. NICHOLS: Well, I'm here on the whole issue
there; I think there's four on the agenda. My name is Debra
Nichols, and I am here representing the Center Point Estates
Homeowners Association. We're not sure how this come about
and why it's in court today, because Mr. Selig, to our
knowledge, should have came to the association. We would
I have been glad to help him on this issue. The whole point
is, we are a platted, restricted subdivision, and we have a
homeowners association, and we deal with any changes as a
group. And it is the property owners' -- to their best
interest to be involved in any changes made to our rules and
7-27-09
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
regulations. And to take that away from the association kind
of undermines it, because that means that anybody could walk
in any court and make a change to our rules and regulations
without that -- without us, and I don't think that's right.
As a property owner, as a board member, whichever, it does --
it takes away our rules and regulations. You might as well
throw them out the window, because they're not any good
without us standing behind them. And the truth is, if he
would have brought this to us, in our rules and regulations,
it does say that for changes to be made, you have to have a
certain percentage of the property owners' signatures to say
we can go forward, we can make the change legally. But
Mr. Selig did not come to the association. He knows that.
He has our phone numbers, e-mail address. He actually spoke
to the president of the board on the subject, but when he
responded back to him, nothing was ever brought -- you know,
he never did come back to us and say, "Well, I would like to
go forward with this." The next thing we know, we're here in
court. We just, you know, found this out this weekend.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You know, I agree with you
that -- that that is the best route to go. Strength in
numbers and all of those kinds of things. And y'all have a
~ homeowners association where things are worked out. However,
the guy has the right to go basically do what he wants to do.
If he wants to come in here and complain to us, that's --
7-27-09
1

3
,~
J
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
65
MS. NICHOLS: But he never made an attempt for the
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's still America.
MS. NICHOLS: Yeah. But if anybody lives in a
homeowners association, I'm sure there's many of them here in
this county, just like if -- you know, most counties do. If
you take that out of our hands, that means that we cannot
enforce any of our rules.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me make a comment.
MS. NICHOLS: That's our concern. It really is a
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me make a comment about
it. My assumption was -- and it's a faulty assumption.
MS. NICHOLS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That the property owner had
been in touch with the homeowners association. And I'm not
making any apologies for not having done it.
MS. NICHOLS: That's okay. It's not your --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I didn't do it 'cause I
thought he had done so. But will you explain to the Court
what your -- what your rule and regulation is as a homeowners
association that would preclude him from collapsing all those
lot lines into one lot?
MS. NICHOLS: Well, the whole point is that any
7-27-09
66
1
?_
3
.~
5
.~
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
changes made to any of the lots, whether they're added,
subdivided, whichever it may be, has to go through the
property owners and get a -- at least a 75 percent vote
saying, yes, the change can be made. And if he would have
came to us, we would have tried to do that, at least let the
property owners know, give them an opportunity to vote on it.
And if it would have been 75 percent of the people said yes,
this would have been accomplished. But he never did. It was
brought -- I mean, it was brought up to our board president,
okay? And he says, "Well, we don't have any problem with it,
but we still have to go through the rules and regulations,"
which means the voting system on that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Who is your board
I~ president?
MS. NICHOLS: Dennis Young. Dennis Young.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MS. NICHOLS: And he sent you an e-mail last -- we
just found out about this yesterday, okay? He sent you an
e-mail last night. I'm sure, with your schedule this
morning, you probably have not seen it. I do have a copy of
that e-mail if you would like to see that, from him.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That may be here, but I've
not opened it. I didn't know I had it.
MS. NICHOLS: I have a copy if you want it.
However, the whole point of it is that we have not tried to
7-27-09
1

3
4
5
0
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 '7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
67
not work with Mr. Selig. If he would have just said, "Okay,
I would like to do these items," we would have went forward
and sent out a letter to all the property owners and would
have asked for them to vote for it, because I don't have
anything against it. Part of my issue is also, too, I
realize that these lots that he owns backs up to some other
property that he owns, okay? My next concern is, okay, that
if he has this and he wants to remove these lots now from the
association, because now he's got them joined as one, which
does butt up to some additional property of his, okay? So,
therefore, does he want to remove these lots altogether from
Center Point Estates? Also, we do have yearly annual dues,
and he is yet to pay those this year. He was sent a bill
earlier this year for those dues.
The transaction that he -- how he ac uired these
q
lots was a trade-off with another property owner out there,
okay? And they traded -- they had mutual property they both
wanted. And I don't know that he was brought aware of the
association. They closed through the title company, so it's
not my responsibility -- the title company never informed us.
The property owner at the time did not let us know he was
trading them to this other gentleman, so we had no way to
know. We didn't even know that these lots had been traded
until, I think, our yearly meeting was in March, so at that
point I'm trying to find who this -- who owns the land now,
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
D
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
68
and I had to spend a couple of weeks doing that to get ahold
of this gentleman. And I sent him a package with all the
rules and regulations, restrictions, everything, the
association. Also the dues request to be paid. Haven't
heard -- you know, haven't gotten that paid yet. So, I don't
know if he's just trying to take the lots completely away
from the association, but it is a platted, restricted area.
And I just don't know why he did not come to us first, 'cause
I do really believe that we would have worked with him and
tried to help him accomplish this part of it that he has
before you today.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have not seen the e-mail.
I'd be happy to read it. The only call I had about this
issue had to do with the proposal to abandon the stretch of
road that's perpendicular to these small lots.
MS. NICHOLS: Well, and the reason that is, is if
you -- I have a plat of that --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I should say road easement.
MS. NICHOLS: Right. See, the reason is, in the
newspaper, which is how we found out, the wording did not
exactly say which road easement, 'cause there is multiple
roads there. And the -- you know, to my understanding, you
know, by what was told to Mr. Hamming this morning was that
it was the one in the back. But there are other road
easements there, and we just wanted to make sure he is not
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 "1
22
23
24
25
69
trying to close those down, because there are other property
owners back there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, there's a road that
comes in off of Center Point Estates Drive, and it goes in
between Lots 230 and 231 and goes to -- to the end here, and
it turns to the right and turns to the left. So, I
understand it's a road, the road coming in, and the proposal
is to abandon the easement for that strip of road that would
be perpendicular to all these small lots.
MS. NICHOLS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the only call I've
I had about it.
MS. NICHOLS: Right. But --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: But that's neither here nor
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a quick question to Rex,
and it goes back to an issue of how we do this. If this were
done as a revision, every property owner in that subdivision
would have been -- received a written notice, but because
it's vacating, we don't have to do that, because we're -- I
mean, I have a hard time separating in my mind the difference
between vacating a lot, a subdivision or part of a
subdivision, and revising it. To me, you can't vacate
without revising it. And I don't understand why you can
vacate a subdivision and then not have to send notice to the
7-27-09
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
~o
people in the subdivision.
MS. NICHOLS: Right. I think that's the whole
point. We have to notify, in my opinion and what we read in
our rules and regulations, that we must notify other property
MS. NICHOLS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- say on. We deal with state
law and statutes related to subdivision and platting, and
your issue is a civil issue, as all homeowner association
disputes are, and we have no authority over that one way or
the other. If there -- if that gets so contentious, the
avenue is to go to district court.
MS. NICHOLS: I think my whole point, really, is
that -- one, that he's just leaving the board out. We could
have, as a -- I think he could have made that same
accomplishment by coming to us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. NICHOLS: Without undermining our rules and
regulations. And I really think that if we allow this to
happen in court, that the next person's going to want to make
all these other changes too and continue on, and how are we
going to stop anybody from making changes to any of our rules
and regulations if we do not go through it, what we consider,
7-27-09
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
71
properly?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm just saying we don't have
authority over that issue.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's hear what the County
Attorney has to say about notification.
MR. EMERSON: The only notice that's required by
statute in the order is publication in the paper.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which did happen.
MR. EMERSON: That's my understanding.
MS. NICHOLS: Unfortunately, the paper came on
Sunday to our area, 'cause the bridge was closed; they
decided not to deliver till Sunday. That's when we found
out, was yesterday.
JUDGE TINLEY: This is vacating lot lines. We're
not amending a plat.
MR. EMERSON: Cancellation of a subdivision, which
is what this is, is under its own little subsection.
MS. NICHOLS: Would it not be, though, --
MR. EMERSON: Only notice that's in there.
MS. NICHOLS: -- cancellation of a plat? Because
he's wanting to change the plat.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I just -- you know, it's been a
-- I've never understood the difference, how you can do one
without the other. But that doesn't -- state law frequently
leaves me at a loss. Okay.
7-27-09
72
.L
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what you're saying is
that notification to adjoining property owners or an
association is not a requirement of the law; is that what
you're saying?
MR. EMERSON: Correct. And may or may not be
correct. It's my understanding that the difference between
the two, Commissioner, is that revision is revising within an
existing subdivision. You're not canceling out of any -- if
you're canceling, you're completely taking it out of the
subdivision.
JUDGE TINLEY: My understanding of what he's
requesting is just to erase out the lot lines, but not to
take it out of the subdivision.
MR. EMERSON: My understanding is it was
communicated to me by Mr. Voelkel that it's a cancellation of
that part of the subdivision.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe we should have
Mr. Voelkel come up to the podium and tell us exactly what is
being proposed by the -- by the property owner.
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The agenda item deals with vacating
23
24 woman,
25 contact
7-27-09
MR. VOELKEL: Yes. This -- and I don't know this
lot lines. That's all it says.
73
"1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 ~~
20
21
22
23
24
25
client is Pete Selig. He owns the land to the west. And --
and I've gone over this with several of y'all. The -- the
lots themselves are really -- today's standards, real
substandard lots. There's six of them, I think, and they're,
like, .2 to .3 acres. They're -- in our standards today,
they're really not even buildable lots. But what Mr. Selig
did is he acquired those lots with an adjoining neighbor.
They kind of did some swaps like she was talking about. No
reason for anyone to be notified. I don't know why she's
upset that they went --
MS. NICHOLS: We should be notified, because as a
homeowners association, we need to know who owns the
property, who is responsible for the property and the dues
that go with it.
MR. VOELKEL: Which we disagree. I don't think
there's any laws that states that everyone who buys a piece
of property has to notify anyone other than the public
records, so I don't think Pete Selig has done anything wrong
by acquiring these lots. You know, and we've been following
the state law. I even met with Rex. We've -- I looked at
state law. It's totally -- I do this; this is my business.
I do developments. I do revisions of plats, vacation. I
mean, we -- we've been following the state law verbatim. I
don't know, legally -- if this happens, if those six lots go
back to vacant land like what we're wanting to do, I don't
7-27-09
74
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l~
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
think it necessarily takes him out of that subdivision --
homeowners association. I think he probably still is
required to pay dues and things like that. If he hasn't,
that's -- I mean, that's not my issue. I don't think that's
y'all's issue. I think that's their issue with him. But the
action that we're asking -- and we're doing, by the way, what
the state law requires us to do -- is to vacate those six
lots into just vacant land, and the next item would have been
to abandon that stretch of road that -- there is no road.
There's an easement that was granted there when the plat was
done, but there never has been a road built.
JUDGE TINLEY: The focus of your request, though,
is not just to erase some lot lines, but to vacate and
eliminate this property that's in question out of the
subdivision, take it out of the subdivision.
MR. VOELKEL: I don't know exactly if that's true.
We're talking about it going back to vacant land. If it is
I
legally bound by their document for him to pay dues and
whatnot, that may still be in effect. I don't know if that's
something Rex can give y'all an idea on. We're talking --
we're not -- if we'd have been taking the lot lines out,
creating one lot, that would have been a revision of plat
like Jon's talking about. That's not what we're doing.
We're not revising --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're eliminating this
7-27-09
"1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 ~~
20
21
22
23
24
25
75
MR. VOELKEL: Correct, as far as being platted
property. Whether or not it's still bound to pay their dues
and things like that, I don't know that answer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think the public
hearing's posted properly.
JUDGE TINLEY: I just see it as eliminating lot
lines, and I don't think that gives fair notice about the
full import of -- of what's going to occur here, that the
property would be, quote, removed from the subdivision.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, let me offer a
suggestion.
JUDGE TINLEY: If that can even be done with this
kind of notice, or whether or not it requires some additional
notice, I --
MR. VOELKEL:	Well,	that's	something -- and y'all
may want to ask Rex. I	think	-- and	Rex and I met
specifically on this item, and we looked at the law that
addresses this specific item, and to my knowledge -- and that
may be something Rex can shed some light on, too -- I think
we've done everything that -- by that law to do what he's
asking to have done.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me offer a suggestion
here, Judge, if I may. Let's complete the public hearing;
anybody else that wishes to speak on it may do so, but not
7-27-09
76
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1 E3
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
take any action on this today, and let me meet with all of
the principals in Center Point and see if we can get all
these questions resolved before any action is required of the
JUDGE TINLEY: And then in the meantime, if there
are any legal issues, those can be sorted out, and if there
are posting or agenda issues that have to come back, that can
be resolved.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Exactly, yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is there any other member of
the public that wishes to be heard with respect to this
particular matter, the vacating lot lines on Lots 216 through
222? Yes, sir. If you'll step forward, give us your name
and address?
MR. GALLAND: My name is Steve Galland. I'm in the
Center Point Estates, and have been for 20 years. I think
one of the things we're missing here is the importance of
homeowners associations. One of the things is, I refinanced
my home recently, and was unable to refinance it without
filling out a form that insured that I had paid my dues. So,
one of the things that I think you need to consider is how
important homeowners associations are and what they can do.
And one of the problems we had here was, yes, we just found
out about this yesterday. Nobody in the homeowners was aware
of it until we were able to read the paper. If it wasn't for
7-27-09
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
the paper, we probably wouldn't have even been here. And I
think that it's important that when you're looking at various
areas, that, in fact, are within a homeowners association,
that you need to insure that -- you know, that's why, 20
years ago, I bought my property, was because of the
homeowners, or I wouldn't have bought it at all. So, I think
one of the things that you need to be concerned about is the
importance of homeowners associations and what they, in fact,
can do to the community. That's all I have. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir. Anyone else? Yes,
ma'am. If you'll come forward and give us your name and
address, tell us your thoughts on this matter.
MS. OSBORN: My name is Carolyn Osborn, and I live
in Center Point Estates. My husband and I are semi-retired
teachers, and we bought property six years ago. It was very
important to us to buy in a subdivision that had restrictions
to protect our investment and our way of life and what we
wanted there. We bought the property exactly across the
creek from the stated property, and we very carefully
reviewed all of the restrictions and the plats that were over
there that were intended for single family homes, with the
expectation that if anything happened over there, it was
going to be a single family home, and not whatever can happen
from here. My thought is that if -- you know, when we bought
our house, we had to go through the homeowners association.
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
78
That was part of the deal of our -- our property transaction.
How in the world this one happened without it, I have no
It seems to me that if a homeowners association
means so little, that anyone can go and get that annulled
over anything, then anyone in this county who lives in a
restricted subdivision is in danger, that someone can decide,
"I don't want to be in the homeowners association any more,
and I'll put up my used car lot or whatever here," because it
means nothing. We can just go cancel, pull out of the
homeowners association. It means nothing. So, I think this
has not just meaning for Center Point Estates, but has
meaning for anyone in this whole county. You will set a
precedent that anyone can use from this day forward.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ma'am, may I say something?
There's some confusion here about what court -- see, I think
you're in the wrong court to be -- to deal with the
homeowners association issues. You need to be in the J.P.
court for that.
AUDIENCE: District court.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's the way I understand
We deal with state law. J.P. court deals with
homeowners associations.
MS. OSBORN: So -- I thought that's what we were
talking about today, is this person's right to withdraw --
7-27-09
"1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
79
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're talking about the man
has a right under state law to either subdivide his property,
if it's in accordance with whatever the subdivision rules and
regulations are, or -- or is perhaps not in violation of
homeowners restrictions. But we're not dealing with zoning
issues, and you got off on that, which would preclude a
junkyard, for example. We don't have zoning authority.
We've never had it, and we're not seeking it. The State
Legislature is not inclined to give it to us. So, you know,
we have to separate some of the issues. The Commissioner's
comment about homeowners association authority, that is
~, enforceable in a J.P. court, and I assume if you don't like
the verdict in the J.P. court, you can work upward. But here
', we deal with only what the law allows us to deal with with
I respect to subdivision rights and regulations and things of
that nature.
MS. OSBORN: So, you can go --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The fact that you notify
the homeowners association -- I regret that they didn't do
that, because it's caused some anxiety among all the rest of
you --
MS. OSBORN: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- folks. But that's --
the fact that he didn't do that is not a requirement that we
can enforce.
7-27-09
80
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. OSBORN: I see. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You know, I have a quick
comment to Rex. This is why I don't understand the
difference between revision and vacating, because by revising
this -- vacating the plat, we are affecting this lady's
property, potentially. And that's the intent of revision of
plat, of giving notice to the subdivision, and for us to
listen to that and make a decision. And maybe it's just --
state law allows for that, but I don't -- under that
interpretation, it seems to me that whenever somebody wants
to revise a plat, all they need to do is vacate it, and I
don't think that's the intent of state law. I think if they
don't like it, they want to do something with their lots,
they just vacate it out of the subdivision, and then no one
has any control over it, and I think that's a problem with
state law. I don't think that's the intent.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a good point.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think the other issue that we're
hearing is that an individual buys property within a
subdivision where there are existing restrictions, buys with
knowledge of those restrictions, and then, in order to avoid
having to be in compliance with those restrictions, takes his
property out of the subdivision. Therefore, it's no longer
subject to the restrictions. I think he's inviting some
7-27-09
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
significant litigation by doing that. But -- but it seems
like a roadmap that -- at least trying to get there. But the
lady has a very good point, that if -- if there's a very
simplistic process, that there can be a very easy and
complete end run that goes around the homeowners association,
and we have no authority. We have no authority to -- to
enforce homeowners association rules, regulations,
restrictions, or otherwise. Those are done by private
individuals, whoever has a justiciable interest in the
proceedings.
Also, I don't think homeowners rules, regulations,
and so forth can override or control what state law allows
this Court to do with respect to subdivisions, but I am very,
very mindful of what the potential impact can be if someone
can approach it in this manner and make this sort of an end
run and, for example, put a noxious commercial activity over
on property that's been moved out of a residential
subdivision with some -- with restrictions that are
protecting some other property owners. So, I -- it's a big
concern. And like Commissioner Letz, I'm very concerned
that -- that we're not reworking a plat, because then, in
effect, we are changing the plat of that particular
subdivision if we remove property out of it. And while there
may not be an absolute drop-dead requirement that we follow
all these procedures, I don't think we're restricted from not
7-27-09
.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
82
doing something stronger up here on this Court to protect
existing property owners. That's my two bits. Yes, sir? If
you would, give us your name and address.
MR. HAMMOND: Ben Hammond, 214 Center Point Drive.
JUDGE TINLEY: All right.
MR. HAMMOND: I'm going to amplify a little bit
what Carolyn said and what you said, Judge. Do all of y'all
have a photocopy of the lots in question?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We have it.
MR. HAMMOND: Okay. They lie along the west
extremity of Center Point Estates in this particular unit on
the west side of Elm Creek. As you can see, there are other
landowners that are on the east side of Elm Creek that butt
up to it, and Carolyn Osborn and her husband are one of them.
I! I just wanted to make a point that if this were removed from
-- from Center Point Estates and the protection that Center
Point Estates Homeowners Association provides everyone, that
it's going to make these lots less valuable and vulnerable to
whatever goes over there, which would be out of anybody's
say-so. I would -- I would hope that the Court could find a
way to at least delay this to a later date so that we can
be -- it can be more fully discussed and researched.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's my suggestion to the
Court, that we delay any action on it.
MR. HAMMOND: I appreciate it, Commissioner.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
83
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The public hearing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anyone else wishing to be heard on
the public hearing aspect of that issue? Seeing no one else
seeking to be heard, I will close the public hearing of
vacating lot lines on Lots 216 through 222 in Center Point
Estates, Unit II.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:46 a.m.,
and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was
reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: And let's quickly try and take care
of the 10:10 item; open a public hearing abandoning a road
easement in Center Point Estates, as shown in Volume 3, Page
103 of the Kerr County Plat Records.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed
at 10:46 a.m., and a public hearing was held in
open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm doing this because the matter's
already been advertised, and I assume that we're dealing with
the same issues.
COMMISSIONER NICHOLSON: Same issue yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: But if -- if anyone wishes to be
heard with respect to abandoning of the road easement in
Center Point Estates as shown in Volume 3, Page 103 of the
Kerr County Plat Records, that being the road easement which
7-27-09
1
2
3
,~
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
84
is shown adjacent to Lot 216 through Lot --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 231 -- 221.
JUDGE TINLEY:	-- 221,	please	step	forward and tell
us what's on your mind.	I assume	those	that	who spoke
against the general vacating of lot lines have the same
position on this matter?
MS. NICHOLS: Same position.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is anybody in disagreement with
that? Okay. We've got that out of the way. Anyone else
wishing to be heard on the vacating of the road easement? If
not, I will close that public hearing, and I will reconvene
the Commissioners Court meeting.
(The public hearing was concluded at 10:47 a.m.,
and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was
reopened.)
JUDGE TINLEY: And we've run over a little bit, so
we're going to be in recess for about 15 minutes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Before we do, Judge --
before we do, I'm going to pull Item 1.14 and 1.16 from
today's agenda.
JUDGE TINLEY: I assumed that was going to happen.
We'll be in recess for about 15 minutes. Thank you.
(Recess taken from 10:47 a.m. to 11:05 a.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
85
we might, and see if we can move more quickly through our
agenda. We'll go with Item 6; consider, discuss, take
appropriate action to authorize participation by Road and
Bridge with the City of Kerrville on a sealcoating project
for Meadow View Lane. This is a matter that we've been
working on a pilot program for a couple of years now, and
Mr. Odom asked that it be brought before the Court.
Essentially, what this would involve is that the Road and
Bridge people, in cooperation with the city folks, Road and
Bridge would -- would utilize their equipment and personnel
to do the sealcoat overlay after all the remainder work is
done by the city of Kerrville personnel on any base repair
failures, whatnot, and traffic control, all those other
components. This is part of that pilot program that we're
getting into to try and get some cooperative efforts going on
with the City. All of the hard costs, emulsion oil, trap
rock and so forth, would be -- would be paid for and provided
by the City.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This boils down to a labor
23
24 agenda
25 road i~
7-27-09
MR. ODOM: May I also make a comment that this
and equipment type --
JUDGE TINLEY: Essentially, yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
86
Tom Daniels and the Singing Winds Park location. It was --
told me, so I -- it was supposed to be the Meadow View area,
which is essentially in that area. So --
JUDGE TINLEY: The way I've got the agenda item,
I'm going to have to bring it back, Leonard. I wish you'd
have let me know this.
MR. ODOM: I didn't know until Friday, till it was
already posted.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would have been too late anyway.
We'll bring it back. We'll bring it back. If you'll make
sure that Jody has those streets?
MR. ODOM: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: And we'll just bring it back.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's such a worthwhile
project, you know. I mean, anything that we can do for the
city, I'm all for.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I knew you were.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. And I hate to see us
wait two weeks on this thing.
MR. ODOM: Well, we're not going to -- I'm asking
-- I wanted y'all's direction to go ahead and proceed. It
will probably be sometime in August. I've got two projects.
I got Bichon that I need to finish.
25 I COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you're doing good.
7-27-09
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
MR. ODOM: And Del and them are doing a real good
job. And then I've got another -- something that just came
up again, Sheppard Rees.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's another good one.
MR. ODOM: And we're going to --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would both be in Precinct
1, Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He doesn't appreciate
Sheppard Rees, I'm sure.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's almost an emergency out
I there.
MR. ODOM: It is. We've discussed that a year ago,
with the emulsions and all out there. But, anyway, we can
address that, and then -- then I'm through with the project,
except Wilson Road, which is an agenda item here. And once I
get through with our projects, I intend to move in, either
August or September.
JUDGE TINLEY: This will not --
MR. ODOM: All I'm asking --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- won't create a problem for you,
'cause it's going to be later on in the summer anyway?
MR. ODOM: Going to be later on.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Let's move on with Item
7; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to amend the
7-27-09
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
88
plat for Lots 9 and 10 of Sleepy Hollow, Section 2, as shown
in Volume 4, Page 224, and located in Precinct 4, pursuant to
Section 6.07(a)(1)(6) of the Subdivision Rules and
Regulations. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Mr. Hannemann owns Lots 9 and
10 in Sleepy Hollow, Section 2, and the owner would like to
sell Lot 9. There is a structure that is over the line, and
also a patio cover. When I went into this this week and I
went out to look at that, I took this to be -- I construed it
as a revision of plat process. However, I think that that
discussion's gone on with Mr. Oehler and the County Attorney,
so I'm going to -- they're saying that I don't need this
revision of plat, so I will either turn to Bruce and ask him
for that opinion -- I wasn't there at the time.
MR. EMERSON: The reason it's listed this way,
Judge, is because what's happened, to the best of my
understanding, is that the two lots were originally laid
out -- they're owned by the same owner, so you have the same
owner on both sides of the property line. Given the advent
of GPS and the accuracy now of surveying, it was determined
that the original course line separating the two lots is off
by a little bit. They want to correct that course line, so
that once that course line is corrected, then the lots can be
sold. But right now, the description doesn't match where the
actual property line is.
7-27-09
89
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: Two questions. Does the
property line go to where we've always thought it did? That
blue line?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No. What we thought it went
to is not where it --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. The
line where we thought it was goes over to --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- the property.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The property.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where the blue line is now.
', COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right, that is the correct
line. That gets it away from the house.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It corrects the issue?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then doesn't the size of
the lots change?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It does slightly, but not
enough to -- to jeopardize the integrity of the subdivision.
MR. HANNEMANN: Actually swaps what they were and
~ are .
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see.
MR. HANNEMANN: They're staying about the same,
just swapping 10 and 9.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all I need to know.
7-27-09
90
"1
2
3
~~
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll move
to Item 8; consider, discuss, take appropriate action for
approval on removing cattle guards on Wilson Creek Road
located in Precinct 3.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There you go.
MR. ODOM: Okay. I came back in February and I
passed out a letter there that we discussed this, and at this
point, we're -- Wilson will be coming up in our projects.
We'd like to complete that in this budget year, and I told
the Court that I would come to ask that permission to remove
them. I'm asking for that permission now. So, within the
next three weeks or so, or less, we should be out there at
Wilson Road doing the sealcoating.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only question I have is,
the state law changes September 1st. Rex, do we have to be
worried about this? Does the work need to be done before
7-27-09
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
91
that, or does this really have any impact on state law, which
changed the notice requirements slightly?
MR. EMERSON: Well, number one, I haven't seen the
new state law. My legislative update session isn't until
next week, so I don't know what the new state law states,
whether it went into effect immediately, or you're saying it
goes September lst.
COMMISSIONER LETZ:	September 1st,	by	what	the --
MR. ODOM: That is	-- that Senate	bill	did	say 1st
of September. We discussed that before.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: And the Court gave me a direction,
basically through Rex, that we did not -- we had already
'I given that notice a long time ago, about a year ago in July.
I And --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under existing law.
', MR. ODOM: That's right. Off the -- the existing
law. And that this new law goes into effect, and then I was
directed to renotify everybody that I'm going to do it again.
So, --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. ODOM: -- it is up to the Court. Personally,
we can wait till lst of September; I can still get it in if
the weather holds, and if not, I feel like we have done
everything that we're supposed to do.
7-27-09
92
"1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2i
22
23
24
25
__
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We've certainly given notice
many times. Clearly, to me, if we do it before
September 1st, then we don't have to worry about the new
state law which goes in place September 1st. But after that,
I just want to make sure that -- I don't want to get hung up
on a technicality, that we need to give a different kind of
notice or something.
JUDGE TINLEY: Would it be your intention to
accomplish this work before September 1?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carried. Let's go to
Item 9.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I kind of hate to see the
'~ cattle guard discussion go away, though. I've had so much
fun.
JUDGE TINLEY: You can discuss that at lunch,
7-27-09
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.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There'll be -- well, there
will be other cattle guards, won't there?
MR. ODOM: Yes, there probably will be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hopefully in Precinct 1.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, there is not.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're not talking about in
Precinct 2, either.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm going to ask the reporter which
one of those four voices she took down.
(The reporter indicated.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The ones closest. Let's go to 9;
consider, discuss, take appropriate action to purchase a used
FEMA trailer, Texas Facilities Commission Federal Surplus
Property Program.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. We had received some data
from Ackerman Road Government Surplus that they had these
trailers. If you remember, several years ago we bought a
FEMA trailer for Ingram yard and replaced the old building,
that little old shed that I had, and which is working very
well. This trailer can be bought -- it's brand-new, and you
saw the pictures -- for $3,000. There will be another cost
of -- additional cost that we estimate probably around $2,000
that I have to go all the way to the Sabine River to pick it
up from the federal government. They will not bring it to
7-27-09
94
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
la
20
21
22
23
24
San Antonio.
JUDGE TINLEY: How inconsiderate.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree.
MR. ODOM: And -- but I think this is a very good
deal, and we would like to do that. I have the money set
aside in 15-611-575 to pay for this. And what we're
anticipating is that sometime in the future, that we would be
able to acquire property for a Comfort/Center Point yard, and
we think that this would work very well. We would bring it
back to our yard, and then once that's secured, whether
that's -- whatever that period of time is, that we would have
it to put in place and have an office down there. We think
it is a very good buy. I don't know -- I can tell you, we
paid more money than that for the last one, and it's as nice,
if not nicer, and for $3,000, and our cost of moving it here
is well worth the money.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's just a shell type
building?
MR. ODOM: It isn't -- no. It is a trailer, fully
furnished.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We get a dining room table,
chairs, stove.
25 ~ JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, with appliances, sure.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
la
20
21
22
23
24
25
95
MR. ODOM: Just like the other one. The other
one's furnished too. It was absolutely nice.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would second the motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
I (The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
~, JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Item 10;
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to accept Mira
Vista Lane North in The Ranches of Sunset Ridge Subdivision
and release the maintenance bond, that being located in
Precinct 3. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. In the past, we've had some
difficulty with the developer not getting vegetation in there
as required, and we have been working with him and we have
got that. It has been checked myself, as well as Wayne
Wells, and we present to the Court to go ahead and accept it
for maintenance. It is a good subdivision. I got some good
grass stands in there now, and I think it's a good
subdivision.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
7-27-09
96
1
3
4
5
0
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
2?_
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
releasing the bond.
MR. ODOM: Yes, I'm sorry. And releasing that
maintenance bond.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further 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. Item 11; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to determine what areas
in the Zone A, the unstudied areas of the floodplain, should
be studied in Precincts 1, 2, 3, and 4. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. I'll try to -- won't try to
make floodplain managers out of you, but in floodplain
there's two areas. One is an AE, is a studied area that the
federal government does, and another is a Zone A, which is
unstudied area; they haven't done any studies in it. John --
I've asked John to take a look, and John has researched
finding some possible state funding to do some of these
studies in Zone A. And at this time, we ask the Court to
consider allowing Mr. Hewitt to pursue state funding on the
proposed creeks and data that we ask you to provide in your
7-27-09
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
areas that you may think that need to be studied. Once we
determine these areas, we will find out how much funding the
State will give us to have these studies done, and that any
data that you have, any recommendations -- we just gave you a
list of things here to mention, but we think that you know
your constituents. You know where some of this development
is going on, and we would like to consider that as part of
the state funding for studies. We ask for your permission to
do so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Leonard, how -- by doing
this, how does it -- how does it benefit the taxpayers of
Kerr County, and in what way?
MR. ODOM: Firstly, it gives us better detail in
the unstudied areas, other than -- it's still approximation.
All things are approximation, but this is better data that
the health and safety and welfare of the people is being able
to come to a closer contour line, whether it's a 4-foot or a
2-foot or a 20-foot. Basically, these are on 20-foot
sections, and you're guessing. We think we can come a little
bit closer with this funding to have a better idea where a
piece of property -- or where that line falls in those
contours. It's safer for the people. We have a little bit
better data. It makes it easier for floodplain to bring in
the citizens and be able to discuss and show it to them. And
if we get the state funding, I don't know if there's a
7-27-09
98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2S
21
22
23
24
25
matching or anything yet, but if there's state funding, I
would imagine it's probably 75/25, and we may be able to do
some of this in-house or in like kind, sort of like FEMA.
But I'm just not -- I haven't gone that far into it. John
says that there is funding available, and we'd like to -- I'd
like to pursue it to see if it's there.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It'll be a FEMA grant? Is
that what we're talking about? John came to see me about
this, and I referred him back to Road and Bridge.
MR. ODOM: I'll turn it over to John.
I
I
'~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I did prepare a packet
~, of maps so that all of us could see exactly what's going on
III in the county and have some specific reference to what -- the
creeks that are in our particular precincts. So --
MR. HEWITT: Commissioner, it's Texas Water
Development Board funding. But the one thing I'd add is,
right now, if you develop your property in a Zone A, you're
going to have to go hire a surveyor or you're going to have
to hire an engineer to determine what the base flood
elevation is that you have to be a foot above. So, the
taxpayer would have to hire that person to do that study. If
you're in an AE zone where that elevation is defined, you
can -- you don't have to do that. And the benefit to the
citizens would be that we would define more AE zones in the
county, and so they wouldn't have to make that payment.
7-27-09
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
99
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the citizen would come
MR. HEWITT: Yeah -- well, we'd have to get that
approved by the state. We would define the floodplain, come
up with the elevation, and have the state approve that, and
then we would go and submit it to FEMA and get their approval
as well.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Like anybody else.
MR. ODOM: But it would be the best --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That would establish the
floodplain.
MR. ODOM: Right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: In areas where we don't
know that now.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We don't know as much as we
should.
I, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What is Zone X?
MR. ODOM: Zone X is the 500. It's two different
ones. It's backed up water, or either it's sloping terrain,
and where you could possibly have flooding; you could be out
of the flood zone. But it's possible in the future, as the
government gets into this, maybe the 500 might come into the
7-27-09
100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
floodplain.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It appears on the map that the
A areas are larger than the AE areas. Is that because
there's a -- because they don't know for sure, they
overestimate, possibly?
MR. HEWITT: Absolutely. They use 20-foot contour
intervals to do that, to define those A zones.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: By doing this, we actually get
more precise information. This helps the public. That, in
turn, saves them --
MR. ODOM: Saves them some money. If we can get --
get the study done, we'll have a better idea.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And your request to us is for
each of us to come up with some creeks that we would like to
go from A to AE?
MR. ODOM: Tributaries to the Guadalupe basically
is what we're looking at. That's what happens, and A is
backed up water. When the Guadalupe gets up, then it backs
up the tributaries to it. That's where they get in trouble,
building back in these areas. And that water's backed up,
'cause you can't go anywhere. Guadalupe's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the study will reveal
that.
MR. ODOM: Sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This study will give us a
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2 !9
21
22
23
24
25
101
better understanding of that.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: And it depends how much we can go up
into a tributary, how much money we got.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are these -- we have the maps
on backup. Is that the whole county? I mean, there's -- I
don't know --
MR. ODOM: I believe so. We just --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You're supposed to have
gotten a whole packet.
MR. ODOM: I don't think it's the whole county. I
think it's areas that we just chose to -- to present to you,
that you're familiar with.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: John prepared a whole
packet for everybody.
MR. HEWITT: But that's not everybody, everywhere
in the county.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Several maps.
MR. HEWITT: Based on the floodplain development
permits we get, we see a lot of activity on the north fork of
the Guadalupe and the Turtle Creek areas. Those are Zone A's
right there.
MR. ODOM: Then you go toward Comfort from Center
Point on up, and the tributaries that feed into it, those are
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
102
the areas we think that development would go as the sewer
line and water goes in.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Verde Creek is always a
problem in terms of if the Guadalupe's over its banks.
Always.
MR. ODOM: Always.
JUDGE TINLEY: On the master map, you've indicated
the areas that you propose to study, that you've highlighted
in there; then there are individual panels of each particular
area?
MR. HEWITT: Exactly.
JUDGE TINLEY: But those are the areas that you
think there's more likelihood of development or possible
building in the future that you think are appropriate areas
to study that would be most affected?
MR. HEWITT: Yes.
MR. ODOM: Appropriate for you to review, but you
may have different thoughts.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: How -- how do you get access to
the property? Don't you have to go out and do a survey, I
would take it, on -- how do you get -- I mean, do you just
call people and see if you can get on the property? We don't
go unless they invite us?
MR.	ODOM:	No, we	don't.
MR.	HEWITT:	And	the one thing, you'll probably
7-27-09
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
have to have a local matching contribution there, and that
would probably be the surveyor would go out -- county
survivor would do that work.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How much money are you
going to seek from Water Development Board for this project?
MR. HEWITT: Depends on which ones of those creeks
you'd like to study. I believe they have $500,000 available
for the whole state this next year, so --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Can't ask for all
that.
MR. HEWITT: No, probably not. A ballpark number
is $10,000 a mile -- a linear mile to study a creek.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 2,000?
MR. HEWITT: 10,000. $10,000.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 10,000.
MR. HEWITT: Per linear mile to do the complete
study.
MR. ODOM: This may be an ongoing project.
JUDGE TINLEY: Five-gallon bucket.
MR. HEWITT: Excuse me?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sounds to me like you need to
find out if you can get some of that money, or like Len said,
get a little bit done each year.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, going to have to be a
25 ~ little bit each year.
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
104
MR. ODOM: This is going to be an ongoing project
for at least five years.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: John, all these that you've
identified on the top map, any and all of the precincts, how
many miles does that represent? Do you know?
MR. HEWITT: I would say that would be 7 to
8 miles. That's a guess.
MR. ODOM: The quicker we get there, then we may
get in line ahead of some other people. And at least if we
don't get it this year, then we would probably be picked up.
MR. HEWITT: And that's a good point, because when
I talked to the Water Development Board, this isn't very
common knowledge right now. Not everybody knows that there's
money available to do this.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Would you prepare the grant
application?
I~ (Mr. Hewitt nodded.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And bring that back for the
Court's approval?
MR. HEWITT: Mm-hmm, based on the streams that
you'd want to study.
MR. ODOM: Nothing's in stone. Moses didn't carve
this out of stone, okay? So it's flexible.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we -- give us a deadline
when to give you the creeks.
7-27-09
105
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 MR. ODOM: How about tomorrow? No.
(Low-voice discussion off the record.)
MR. ODOM: He said September 21st is when they
would like to have something, so how about the -- by the
second meeting in August? Is that enough time?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And we communicate back to
John or you?
MR. ODOM: Then we can go back to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This shouldn't take that long.
We really can't afford to do a whole lot. Maybe identify
10 miles, and --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. ODOM: Then we'd see what our funding is over
five years, see if we can do that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you want to just bring the agenda
item back next meeting?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: And by that time, they'll each have
the preferences.
MR. ODOM: Hopefully that gives everybody enough
time to --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. ODOM: -- relate their -- their interest in an
area. You know, it may not be the whole tributary.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
7-27-09
106
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: Maybe half a mile up the tributary, or a
mile. And at least a mile up a tributary from the Guadalupe
would take care of a lot of people, or a lot of land.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You want us to get it
straight back to John, not you?
MR. ODOM: That, or -- you could either get with
John or give it to Kelly.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to come back on
the Court and come up with a list, and we each get about two
to two and a half miles, it looks like.
MR. ODOM: I would suggest that. Two, two and a
half miles.
I COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Might get it over with
quicker than that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know. I could
pretty well predict --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mine's done.
MR. ODOM: Okay.
~' COMMISSIONER LETZ: His is all studied.
MR. ODOM: I think those are on there that we
looked at.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MR. ODOM: So, is the Court going to get with us
7-27-09
107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and give it so I can put it on the next agenda?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, put it on the next agenda;
we'll come back. Let's go to Item 12; consider, discuss,
take appropriate action to accept a proposal from John Hewitt
for emergency action plan for Ingram Lake Dam located in
Precinct 4.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir, if I can open it. The -- I
went to the dam safety seminar in Brady, and after coming
back, finding out that we have a new state law January the
lst of '09, and T.C.E.Q. has defined the steps involved in
the emergency action plan. We have three dams, and of those
three, the Ingram Dam is listed as high priority. It's high
risk, and the other two are low risk. So, what John and I
have talked -- he has looked at, there is a procedure, and I
think in this packet that you see where T.C.E.Q. had criteria
to have an action plan in case a dam broke, and how to
identify that. What we need to do is have the impact area
determined. That has not been done on our dams. The
priority is Ingram Lake, that dam in Ingram. And once we do
that, there's a price that John has said that he could take
this information, after talking to T.C.E.Q., we could
determine that impact area, and from that -- and then we put
the plan together. Now, what I didn't put here is that I
would -- I suggest that we do this for $4,000, that we
identify that, and to meet T.C.E.Q.'s requirements. Also,
7-27-09
1

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
108
next year. And I have the money, a line item to take care of
that in flood -- flood control, or flood damages.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you have four or do you
have eight?
MR. ODOM: Sir?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do you have 4,000 or do you
have 8,000?
MR. ODOM: I have 6,000. I have 4,000 to cover
this Ingram Dam. The only thing we need -- the two that are
low, that's Center Point and Flat Rock; I don't have to do
anything to, not by state law. Okay? But what I'd like to
do with Flat Rock Dam is to come back next budget year and do
an impact study on that. And the reason is because I'm
concerned that development will occur between where that
impact area is and the dam, and if that occurs, then we
change our tort liabilities and we change -- we jeopardize
the rating, to move the rating from a low to a high. And I
don't need all the things that T.C.E.Q. -- T.C.E.Q. has
required, because all I need is that impact area. It's low
priority. But if we don't look at something to control
development between that dam and that impact area, then we're
very likely to change the risk level on that dam.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let me offer to you,
Leonard, that while the current assessments might be that
there's not a lot of development beneath Flat Rock Lake Dam
7-27-09
109
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1~
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: That's what we're afraid of.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just west of Brinks
~ Crossing.
MR. ODOM: Well, I don't know where the impact
area's going to be. I don't think it's going to be that far
down; however, what we need to determine is that impact area.
Should that dam breach, where -- what is that impact area?
John can do that, and we can do it for less money than
$4,000, but we need to know that. And I believe then -- Rex
is not going to like this, but we'll maybe authorize him to
take a look at it. I need to talk to some people to find out
what the legal definition of "structures" is. I've been told
by a gentleman that -- a lawyer that was retired from FEMA,
that you can restrict -- it has to be done properly, but you
can restrict development. Is a pavilion or a boat dock
construed as a structure? Very vague. I need to find out
what they're talking about. I believe that we can restrict
development between the dam and that impact area. If we do,
then we keep that dam at a low risk.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think you're talking
about two things here. You're talking about an emergency
action plan, and now you're talking about an extension of
7-27-09
110
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
that and getting into restricting development in a certain
MR. ODOM: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, what are we talking
about? A or B, or both?
MR. ODOM: Emergency plan -- oh. Well, no, listen
to me.
9
10 plan.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm trying.
MR. ODOM: Okay. Ingram Dam requires an emergency
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
MR. ODOM: No ifs, ands, or buts, high priority.
The other two do not, sir. What I'm saying is that the one
at Flat Rock, I believe that we need to do an impact study
just where the impact area is. Not all the things that John
has to do for Ingram, but where the impact area is, then we
can look at that development. Where is that distance from
the dam, and how can we limit that development so a low area
does not become high? I believe it only takes seven
structures or seven people to be jeopardized; we go to high.
Then you're going to have to do things. You're going to have
to have inspections. And I would like to think that we could
~I catch it and keep it in a low area and limit that
development, whatever that development may be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: County Attorney is waving his
7-27-09
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
arm saying we can't talk about anything except Ingram Dam.
The agenda item says Ingram Dam only.
MR. ODOM: Okay, I won't do it again. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Better to ask forgiveness than
permission, isn't it?
MR. ODOM: I will, yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, we need an agenda item to
discuss Flat Rock for next year's budget, and you want to --
we're going to go ahead and proceed with Ingram now?
MR. ODOM: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think this is a good idea. I
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- I'm sure the City of
Kerrville really likes the idea with Ingram.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Commissioner Williams and I
attended a seminar in San Antonio on this very issue several
months ago.
MR. ODOM: We have the system -- Rusty has that
system on the phone system. Once we can identify the impact
area, then we can identify those properties and put that
phone where they can be called should there be an emergency.
So, we just need to do the analysis to determine that impact
area, and then we have a system to identify everybody.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Quick question. Mr. Hewitt,
7-27-09
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
112
does the study for Ingram Dam, does it -- or when you do that
study, will it include impact on U.G.R.A. -- or whatever that
lake's called now, Lochte Lake or whatever? It won't include
that?
MR. HEWITT: No, it will only be Ingram Lake Dam.
It won't extend that far down.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The impact doesn't go -- it's
not that big an impact?
MR. HEWITT: No.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Water gets --
MR. ODOM: Its surges.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Elongates real fast.
MR. ODOM: Going to elongate real fast.
MR. HEWITT: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move we approve the
proposal from John Hewitt for the emergency action plan for
Ingram Lake Dam.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded. Question
or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Funds are to come from our
flood control?
MR. ODOM: Yes, uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Flood control.
MR. ODOM: From 459. 611-459.
7-27-09
1

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2i
22
23
24
25
113
JUDGE TINLEY: Further 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. As earlier
indicated, you're going to pass Item 14 and Item 16. We'l1
go to Item 17; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to
authorize Kerr County Maintenance Supervisor to go out for
bid for electrical, plumbing, HVAC, and pest control
services.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll go to
Item 18; consider, discuss, take appropriate action regarding
approving the inmate telephone service agreement with Global
Tel*Link Corporation. Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is also the current
provider for our inmate phone system at the jail. We've had
7-27-09
114
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
them for five years now, Global Tel*Link.
JUDGE TINLEY: Kerr County Attorney approve this?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Rex has approved the contract.
It's not something we have to go out for bids, 'cause it's
not what we're spending money on. We make a little money off
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second -- so moved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll go to
Item 19; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action
regarding renewal of the Texas Department of Public Safety
Interlocal Cooperation Contract. Sheriff?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: All this does is help us
acquire all the equipment to run the breathalyzer,
intoxilizer that's run by D.P.S. You have to have
mouthpieces. This is just a renewal that we do every year.
Rex looked at it a few minutes ago, okay? He did not have it
before then, but it's one of the very basic -- two-page deal.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2~
22
23
24
25
115
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? All in favor, signify by
raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. We'll go to 20;
consider, discuss, take appropriate action to adopt amended
bylaws/resolution dealing with membership and duties of the
Library Board as adopted by the Library Advisory Board.
Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Library Board has been
redoing some of the bylaws. I think it's actually going to
be called an ordinance from the City, and I'll just tell you
very briefly what the major change is, and it's in Section 3,
and it's the board shall be composed of eight members. Three
members serving as ex-officio status will be composed of one
Commissioners Court, one City Councilman, and one member of
the Kerrville Genealogical Society. They will not be voting
members any more.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How's that differ from the
current?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The current one, we are
7-27-09
1
?_
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
116
voting members, except the Genealogical Society doesn't have
a representative. And I don't see any problem with it,
because we're not doing a 50/50 cost share any more. We're
giving "X" amount of dollars by contract every year, and I
don't really see any reason why that we should vote, either
the Council or myself, 'cause we don't really have any
authority anyway; all we do is we're kind of the messengers.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's a motion to approve
the new ordinance of the -- the --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- the Library Advisory
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll go to
Item 21; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
approve and adopt ETJ agreement with the City of Kerrville.
Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, can we pass on this till
after lunch? Mr. Browning needed to go to a meeting at 11:30
7-27-09
"1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
117
and asked that -- he'd like to be present for this
JUDGE TINLEY: You think he will?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think so.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll move to Item 22; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action concerning adoption of
child safety fees by Kerr County as permitted by Texas
Department of Transportation. This is a matter that TexDOT
notified me about, and if we want to adopt that, we must do
so by a given time. Otherwise, we merely send this in, and
we will remain the same with our standard $10 fee. The
maximum fee for child safety that only a few counties have
adopted is -- you can probably see by the information
furnished, is a maximum of $1.50. Anybody inclined to go --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you want to adopt it?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't want us to become
known as a fee -- a county that just raises fees all the
time. We do that occasionally, and we have a lot of fees,
but if we start just grabbing hold of everything that comes
along, you know, we're going to get -- I don't know. I have
a -- I have bad thoughts about people that just live -- try
to live off of fees. But --
7-27-09
1
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 OEHLER: I was going to say, I hope
there's a "but" on there.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- that $1.50 is big-time
stuff.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, we're getting $1.50 now,
and if we -- is that --
JUDGE TINLEY: No, we're getting $10 now per
registration.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: This is an additional fee. I think
I it' s --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Let's not --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- not to exceed a 1.50.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: From 50 cents to $1.50.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We could set it at --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There it is.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- 78 cents.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: And I assume your motion is for the
~ $1.50?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we have a motion to adopt the
child safety fee of $1.50.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The Tax Collector has --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Bolin has a comment.
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
119
MS. BOLIN: That is a special fund that has to be
-- that the County gets nothing from. All we get to do is
collect it and send it to the state. And, personally, I
don't think it's a good idea. Within the next two years,
TexDOT's revamping our registration fees, and it's more than
likely that a vehicle that is now $40 will be $100. And when
you start adding on even this dollar and a half, I don't
think it's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Road and Bridge fee, the
$10 Road and Bridge fee, do we either keep all of it or --
MS. BOLIN: The $10 we do; the dollar and a half we
get nothing from.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We get nothing out of this
dollar and a half?
23
2 4 and the
25
7-27-09
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just builds up over there,
MS. BOLIN: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm just reading the -- it says
it's used to provide school crossing guard services. How do
they do it if it doesn't get local -- I mean, the money has
to somehow get back to the local community.
MS. BOLIN: That part I'm not sure of. I haven't
been able to find any more information out about how it's
actually divided out.
120
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, the $10 Road and Bridge
fee we do keep, and we use it for special projects, I think,
MS. BOLIN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And this thing, we don't get
anything out of it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's a point,
though. How -- if we don't get anything out of it, how would
they propose that it be used locally for --
MS. BOLIN: That part I haven't figured out.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- crossing guards and
MS. BOLIN: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I guess we could put them
out in replacing the cattle guards. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a thought. They
could stand guard over cattle.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion. Do we have a
second? Motion dies for lack of a second. I will submit the
same fees as imposed previously. Let's go to Item 23;
consider, discuss, take appropriate action on proposed
disaster/emergency employee policy which allows reimbursement
for employees during disasters as permitted by state and
federal regulations. I had drafted this language to -- our
regional state emergency management people encouraged us, if
7-27-09
121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2G
21
22
23
24
25
we wanted to be able to obtain reimbursement from FEMA,
primarily, and maybe to a lesser degree any state agency, in
cases where our county employees may have taken on additional
duties or worked extra hours on state or federally declared
disasters, that the only way that we were going to be able to
do that is if we had a policy -- a county-wide policy in
place which authorized that. So, in that regard, I drafted
this section to go with our personnel policy for compensation
-- personnel compensation policy. It allows that additional
compensation, compensatory time or whatever, as permitted by
applicable reimbursement regulations of the state or federal
government. So, without that reimbursement, it would not be
applicable. That's why I did it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This -- best you can tell, this
is sufficient language? It seems pretty simple.
JUDGE TINLEY: I bounced it off of the state
emergency management people, and they did a total disclaimer,
that they don't give legal advice. They don't -- you know,
they sit over there and do their bureaucratic thing and
collect their bureaucratic paycheck. I asked in advance of
preparing this provision for some assistance from them, maybe
some samples of other policies that might have been put in
place by other -- other local governments, and they declined.
They want to stay above the fray.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
122
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? Ms. Hyde?
MS. HYDE: Can we change one word?
JUDGE TINLEY: What's that?
MS. HYDE: You see it on about the third line down,
where it says, "such employee shall be entitled." Can we put
"may"? And that way it stays with the flow in case they
don't, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good point.
MS. HYDE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Good point.
MS. HYDE: Y'all taught me "shall" and "may."
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Works for me.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's good.
JUDGE TINLEY: It's still tied to whatever the
reimbursement program is anyway.
MS. HYDE: Yes.
JUDGE TINLEY: 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.
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22.
23
24
25
123
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to
Item 24; consider, discuss, and take appropriate to return
check to the Hill Country Community M.H.M.R. on the C.S.U.
road and parking lot project. As most of you know, we got a
check for -- I believe it was for material costs on the
C.S.U. road and parking lot that was done in a very, very
professional and expert manner by our Road and Bridge people,
and I don't think the M.O.U. that we entered into with them
provided for that, so I'd like authorization to return the
check to them.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, although they should
pay for the material, I agree with you; the M.O.U. does not
allow you to do that, so I move to return the check to them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have -- and the M.O.U. does
cover the -- the Sheriff's concerns about being able to take
people over to the State Hospital?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Different issue.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I thought it was all part of
the same issue. That's why we did this thing. If we don't
get anything to help the Sheriff, why don't we keep the
money?
7-27-09
124
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How's that solve the issue?
,~
L
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: There are some issues that are being
worked through. No, I'm not -- we're outside the agenda
item, and those are being worked through.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So, we can always
reinforce them.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think progress is being made.
Within the last several weeks or so, I've not been made aware
of any difficulties.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Further question or discussion? All
in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion dose carry. Okay. Let's
go to Item 25; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to
write a letter of support to L.C.R.A. on behalf of the Tierra
Linda Volunteer Fire Department for their grant request to
help purchase a new 2,000-gallon tanker truck. I put this on
the agenda at the request of the Tierra Linda Volunteer Fire
Department. They're technically located in Gillespie County
immediately north of the county line, but as we know, they
have a contractual relationship with Kerr County and serve an
area -- primarily Northwest Hills, Aqua Vista, the area just
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
125
north of town.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Everything that end of the
county, they do respond.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval, Judge.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Let's go to
Item 26; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to
approve and adopt personnel policy.
MS. HYDE: Y'all may not be happy about this.
There's been some more changes. We just added some more.
The I.T. policy that you guys reviewed, did y'all have any
additional changes? Rex found some grammatical errors he
wanted corrected in it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did you provide it to all
of us?
MS. HYDE: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Has everybody seen the new
I.T. policy?
7-27-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
126
MS. HYDE: I sent the I.T. policy out to everybody
last week, and then I think Jody made some copies for some
folks and put it in their boxes. Rex had a couple of
suggestions on some of the wording, and we've had some
changes throughout this. So, I'd like permission -- rather
than approve what you have in this book right now, I'd like
permission to go one more Commissioners Court before we
approve it so that they have one more chance to go through it
completely, all the strikeouts, everything is gone, so now it
looks like a finished product.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Why don't we just
pull it and come back another day?
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. Let's move to
Item 27; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to
declare certain personal property as surplus, authorize the
County Clerk to trade out the used microfilm equipment, Items
1, 2, and 3, for services of scanning of old records, and for
disposing of the remaining items, Numbers 4, 5, and 6, that
being calculators, typewriter, and ballot joggers.
Ms. Pieper?
MS. PIEPER: Basically, gentlemen, this is just
equipment that is not working or that we do not need. The
company that comes in my office and does scanning said that
they can use the microfilm equipment for parts, if we -- with
permission to trade out for services for the old equipment.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1?
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
127
And then as far as the Items 4, 5, and 6, the calculators,
the typewriter, and the ballot joggers, those are -- the
calculators and the typewriter are -- they're broke; they
don't work. The ballot joggers are not needed, because that
was with the old system that we had.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 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: Motion does carry.
MS. PIEPER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go to Item 28; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action to afford public access
to Kerr County wells at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center
and Little League fields, and associated issues.
Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'm not sure what the
associated issues are, Judge, but I figured we'd sort that
out here. The purpose of putting it on the agenda was for us
to discuss whether or not we can or are willing to make water
available to those who have need from the wells -- I think we
7-27-09
1

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
128
have two wells, one at the Ag Barn and one at the Little
the Ag Barn. I'm not sure whether the casing is in such
condition that we can reestablish that or not, but I think
somebody on this Court knows that. And I also know that --
at least I believe I know that the Little League field well
is tied into irrigation. Is that right, Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And what would be necessary
there. So, I thought it a good time for us to talk about all
the issues and determine whether or not we're willing to do
it, what's involved.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see a question.
MS. McMAHON: I just wanted to mention, Gene
Williams, our manager at Headwaters, is at a conference in
Corpus this week, but I talked to him a little bit about it.
The well at the Little League field is permitted for, I
think, about 2,700,000 gallons of water, and it could
probably be used, but not for potable purposes. And what
Gene told me is it's important to keep in mind that T.C.E.Q.
would have some stringent requirements in terms of how the
water is transported to the area of use, if that's what
eventually happens.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How it's transported?
MS. McMAHON: The containers and so forth. I think
7-27-09
:L
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
129
Gene said Section 290 publishes requirements for containing
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Clearly, I think it's -- I
mean, I know it's non-potable water, because it's not a
public water system, even though it's perfectly good water.
MS. McMAHON: It's fine for flushing toilets,
washing clothes, other things that people need to do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. But I think it -- I
mean, I've not looked at that Little League well in some
years, but it is a relatively simple matter to make a hookup
so it could be used. I mean, there's a hose bib out there,
and it's a -- I want to say it's a 3-inch line that comes out
of that pump house, so you could pretty easily put up some
sort of a stand pipe that you could rapidly fill up, you
know, some vessels. I mean, I don't think it's really set up
for trucks, things of that nature, but I think for, you know,
people that need water, it could be -- I'm sure Tim could go
out and look, see what it would take. I don't think it's
that much to get it ready so people who need that water --
and they can actually probably hook up -- I'm trying to
figure out -- tap into that line over on the new -- across
Third Creek, the new fields, and make it an easier spot to do
it, rather than doing it right at the well, 'cause that line
goes all the way to -- by the bridge over to the other side
of the park.
7-27-09
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
130
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Easier to get in and out.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: In and out over there.
Otherwise, you have to drive back on that grass behind the
fields, run over pipes and brick, irrigation lines. Might
end up having more problems than -- but, yeah, I think that
if there's -- I'm not sure how great the need is. I hate to
spend a whole lot of money there, but certainly, that is a
very good well.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think one of the questions
is whether -- you know, whether we can make that water
available legally to them, to the public. You know, whether
we -- you know, no matter -- however we'd like to, I'm just
not sure that -- and Rex I think can enlighten us. Because
we have, you know, good storage and a big well that Mountain
Home Fire Department has that's part of the agreement; they
provide water to the county. But how do we do it?
MR. EMERSON: I think it's a lot more complicated
than what you're probably prepared to address today, 'cause
as you know, the County can only perform functions as
specifically designated by the State. And under Local
Government Code 562, which addresses the sale of the surplus
county water, it defines county surplus water as water that
the County's acquired from an underground source for the
county's water supply, and that it's not needed for county
purposes. The problem comes up in the next section, where it
7-27-09
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
restricts the sale or delivery of water to a public
citizens.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, that's interesting.
MR. EMERSON: I'm no expert in the area, but my
assumption would be that it doesn't allow for it, because if
you're just distributing water to private citizens, you fall
under the Public Utilities Act.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. And I -- and, I mean,
there is a -- the city of Kerrville -- I shouldn't say that;
I'm not sure if they're under Stage 3, if they can or will
provide water. Normal times, they will. You can buy water
from them.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Somebody told me that they
are currently doing that. Didn't you tell me that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know they were, but when they
get -- I'm not sure; did they go to Stage 3 last week? They
didn't?
JUDGE TINLEY: Newspaper headline this morning said
they've averted going to Stage 3, is what I recall seeing.
~, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know that they're -- I think
that may disappear. Or I'm not sure what their rules are,
but, I mean, there is -- they are set up to do that, I know,
7-27-09
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
and do do it. But I think that, clearly, while we have good
intentions to try to let our wells be available, lots of
other legal problems may come with doing that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, if the County
Attorney says the law says we can't do it, we can't do it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything further on this one,
gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The only other option would be
if the Judge declared an emergency, possibly. That changes
the rules.
MR. BOLLIER: You don't want me to do anything?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We're probably not there
yet.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Not yet.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Well, we're obviously going
to have some things to consider after lunch, so, why don't we
recess now for lunch. We'll come back at -- come back at
quarter of 2:00.
(Recess taken from 12:05 p.m. to 1:50 p.m.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if
citizen that wanted to participate with respect to the
floodplain areas, Zone A's and whatnot that should be
studied. And, yes, ma'am? Let's go back and let me recall
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
133
Item 11; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to
determine what areas in the Zone A floodplain should be
studied in Precincts is 1, 2, 3, and 4. Ma'am, if you'd come
forward and give us your name and address and tell us what
your input is on these items, we'd appreciate it.
MS. LOVETT: Well, my name is Frances Lovett, 6749
Highway 27. My property is bordered on the south by the
river and on the north by Highway 27. And, actually,
Mr. Odom and Mr. Hewitt answered most of the questions I
have. I thought they were very complete in what they're
doing, but the one question still remaining is, at what point
will the Commissioners, or anyone in town, I guess -- I
understand you guys can only answer for yourself, but will
there be public hearings or input with -- with you all having
this -- the further study determination coming up, like
within the next couple of weeks, will there be any chance for
just ordinary citizens to -- who might have a -- who might
have an interest in that, to participate?
JUDGE TINLEY: My understanding, Ms. Lovett, is
that the matter is going to be reset for probably next
meeting, which will be the second Monday in August, and at
that time, each of the Commissioners will have provided their
priority areas to -- to Mr. Odom and the floodplain
administrator as to areas that they want in their respective
precincts to be studied, and the matter will be discussed
7-27-09
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
when that item is back on the agenda.
MS. LOVETT: Yeah. So, bottom line is if -- if
there is a resident in either one of you -- you gentlemen's
county who has a question or -- or wants to have their creek
studied or something, they need to contact that individual
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
MS. LOVETT: Is that right?
JUDGE TINLEY: That would be my suggestion, yes,
ma'am. Sure would be.
MS. LOVETT: All right.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Tell me exactly -- do you
live out west of town?
MS. LOVETT: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: East.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: East, okay.
MS. LOVETT: I live way east. I've got a Comfort
I address.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. There he is.
MS. LOVETT: Yeah, I know.
JUDGE TINLEY: Didn't sound real excited about
that, Jon. (Laughter.)
MS. LOVETT: Yeah. Well, no, I didn't mean it --
no, it's just that I do understand, 'cause he comes -- I work
the polls, and he comes to vote in my precinct. That's the
7-27-09
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
way I know Mr. Letz.
JUDGE TINLEY: Glad tc know that Jon's exercising
his right to vote.
MS. LOVETT: Well, now you guys got me offtrack,
see. (Laughter.) My whole thrust is -- is community input.
And my experience with people in the county is more -- not
old-timers, people moving into the county, is they put a lot
of store in the FEMA floodplains. Now, I have had -- I made
it a little project of mine to tell people, when they're
building a house or, you know, I see surveyors out looking,
"Do you realize this was under 28 feet of water back in
1978?" And I've had them say over and over, "Well, FEMA's
taken care of that. That's not a 100-year floodplain any
more," you know. So, I really feel like our public needs
some education. They really depend a lot. So, will there be
hearings? Do y'all project, even beyond this next couple of
weeks, that there will be any hearings before a final plat is
submitted?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think -- I'm not sure of the
process that we'll be going through on adoption, but there
will be opportunity for the public to give us input, either
one-on-one, or we'll have -- it will be -- any action taken
will be at the Commissioners Court, and we'll be able to --
and maps will certainly be public prior to us voting on them.
MS. LOVETT: Oh, I got you, okay. Now, I know some
7-27-09
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
of this -- since I was here this morning, some of this needs
to go to Mr. Hewitt, because I guess he's the person who
submits the final -- whatever. Or maybe y'all do.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's working for the County.
He's working for us.
MS. LOVETT: I got you, okay. So, then, I guess my
only request would just be -- would just be that nothing be
sent in to FEMA without public comment. And I guess that's
part of the process, so why am I here, huh?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Glad you're here.
MS. LOVETT: Thank you so much.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Lovett. Okay. Let's
go to item -- let me find it -- back to Item 21, which we
passed this morning, to consider, discuss, take appropriate
action to approve and adopt the ETJ agreement with the City
of Kerrville. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. Let me hand out -- I'll
do this part first, what I just handed out. These are some
items that I wrote down. We can go through them one by one
briefly, but I think they need to be addressed in the
interlocal agreement with the City of Kerrville. And some of
these, I think, you know, I put down partially, because I
just think they need to be talked about a little bit more.
And some of them are things that actually need to be done
exactly as I wrote them. But the first one, the maps, when
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
137
we get to the map in a minute, as to how we revised it based
on the workshop, or I revised it.
Second item was under the City of Kerrville,
develop or revise rural standards -- subdivision standards.
And I talked to the City Manager about this briefly the other
day, and I'm still unclear really as to where the City's
going with their rural subdivision standards, if they're
going to continue to have them or not have them, but I think
that they need to have them. I hope they continue to have
them. And I just would like it addressed in the agreement
that if they are going to have rural standards which we
support, that we would like to be consulted as a Court before
they adopt them. And not that we would veto or anything like
that; I just think it's important. I think there's, you
know, rural standards or something that they do have now, and
hopefully they'll continue.
Next one was all roads constructed in a subdivision
in the ETJ shall be built to Kerr County road standards.
This has been a sticking point under our last agreement. And
our road standards are very, very similar, but in the ETJ, if
it's going to be a County-maintained road, we clearly have to
-- they have to go through our standards. I mean, they just
have to; that's all -- just the only way I look at it.
Really, if they're not going to be turned over to the County,
they still should be built to our standards. I don't think
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 c~
20
21
22
23
24
25
138
there's a problem with that with the City, but I just wanted
to make sure. I think it needs to be real clear that those
standards are ours, 'cause our standards are very, very
similar at the moment.
Next one is something I didn't see addressed in the
draft that I saw of the agreement, but sure as anything,
we're going to come up with a map that's going to have lines
on it, and the first developments we get are going to cross
those lines, and I think that we need to have in the
agreement who's going to handle those so both jurisdictions
don't handle them. And I put in here that if it crosses
inside the ETJ, the boundary of our area of jurisdiction
versus the City's, the City would have authority on it. And
then if it goes between the ETJ into the county, the County
would have jurisdiction on it. Right now, we kind of have
been splitting that up a little bit, and it's -- I think it's
confusing. We need to have some --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, one --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It needs to be addressed.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- one point that I could
make with that is that, what if -- if it says it's built to
the City of Kerrville standards, what about them approving
those substandard lot sizes that are in the ETJ, but require
on-site sewage facilities?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, they're -- that's
7-27-09
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
addressed a little bit later.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. It just looked like
that was --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Jon, before you move on, --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- the one that talks about
any proposed subdivision in the ETJ that falls within the
boundary of both jurisdictions shall be only subject to
standards of the City. Then the next one talks about the
same thing, but it says be subject to the standards of the
County. Am I reading it wrong?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The second one is crossing the
ETJ boundary.
JUDGE TINLEY: Going outside.
~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: Going outside of the ETJ
boundary. The first one's crossing boundaries that -- that
we have created within the ETJ.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the second one is going
beyond the ETJ.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not really hung up on how
we do that. I just think that it's important that it's
addressed, because it seems like they are always crossing
boundaries. I think we need to have an agreement on that. I
7-27-09
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
just wrote down something that came to mind in the agreement.
And I can support what I wrote, but it's just -- you know,
some things I'm a lot more stubborn on my belief than others.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which one -- City of Kerrville
and Kerr County shall be responsible for floodplain review
and necessary permits for subdivisions within their
respective areas of jurisdiction. Again, this needs to be
addressed. This is the way that Len Odom would like to do
it. I'm not sure the City can do that. I'm not sure the
City has jurisdiction outside of the city limits of
Kerrville. And I see Mr. Browning shaking his head that they
don't. But, again, I think we need to make it very clear in
here. And we might be able, through interlocal agreement,
though, to give them that authority, but I don't know. It's
something that needs to be resolved so when we're signing off
on plats, we know exactly who has to sign. And then the --
the last one is any plat where lots are served by on-site
septic service shall be approved by Kerr County Environmental
Health Department on preliminary and final plats. That's --
I think there were some problems in the last round of this,
and I don't know how the City wants to handle it, but that's
something that's critical. I know that there's a -- it's
circulated through, but they just need to be in the approval
process. And we don't have any latitude on that; state law
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
141
requires it, you know, so it just needs to be worked into the
system.
These are some points that I came up with. Rex
looked at the draft agreement and had some comments also on
it. I guess everyone got a copy of his comments. And I --
and I agree with him. And the way it's worded right now on
Section 3B, it says, "In carrying out its authority under
this agreement, the County shall not lessen any subdivision
regulation or public improvement specification of the City
applicable to subdivisions." That, to me, and I think to
Rex, is going back to trying to come up with one set of rules
for the ETJ, and I thought -- I think we're doing -- I
thought we were going in a different direction where we're
going to have city rules in the city areas and county rules
in the county areas, subject to a few modifications. I don't
know if that was a -- I'm not sure. That needs to be
clarified, because that doesn't make sense, in my mind, to
have that provision in there. That kind of -- well, then,
why are we even going through a map and dividing up areas of
jurisdiction if we're having the exact same set of rules? If
we have to have one set of rules, we need to go back to the
drawing board and come up with one set of rules. That's
where we couldn't -- we were at an impasse before when we
went to going with the map.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. If you were able to
7-27-09
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
142
do that, this conversation would have been over two years
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. So, those are the
comments I have. The process on this, I know City Council
and County are both -- we're anxious to get this process
moving and get it resolved as quickly as we can. I think
what we need to do, really, is at this point, you know, focus
on the areas of jurisdiction, try to get that hammered out,
and really, this week at the latest. I think we're almost
there, I think, or are there. And then get the documents and
our requirements and the City's requirements to the County
Attorney and City Attorney and let them work out a draft
agreement. I don't believe that the County Attorney has
visited with the City Attorney at all on this phase of -- the
most recent phase, writing the draft. The City Attorney
wrote -- has written two drafts so far, and we haven't given
an official response back one way or the other, and that's
going to take several weeks, I mean, to get that done. So, I
think we need to, you know, still work on the outline as we
have been, try to -- and get that guidance to the two
attorneys to write the agreement. But all of that's for
naught if we can't agree on a map. And based on our
workshop -- I'll stand up and look at it. Or do y'all care
to look at it? I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does anybody care?
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
143
JUDGE TINLEY: Making my eyes water.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We care. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We care.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We love you, Jon. We love
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Went into three areas where I
added more -- I guess shifted from the City's jurisdiction to
the County jurisdiction. It's the area pretty much from Twin
Springs over towards Creekwood, and the idea is to leave it
at a 2,000-foot line -- yeah, from the city limits to this
new line we're drawing, so it's pretty easy to define it. Do
the same thing up in Scenic Hills Subdivision north of I-10,
behind Cecil Atkission, up in that area, and then do the same
thing over in the Bear Creek area. Other than that, no
changes, other than the area across from Whiskey Canyon on
Highway 16. To me, that should go to the city jurisdiction.
I mentioned to Mr. Browning; I think I mentioned to Todd
Parton also that, you know, I really I wouldn't have a
problem. It's up to the City, really, but all the way around
the city limits, if there was a little 100-foot buffer into
the county area, 'cause I think that -- and I think, really,
Kerrville South area, I think the county or the city limits
line, I guess, is right along Lehmann Drive, somewhere right
along there, and some of that, whatever happens there, I
think that's really more Kerrville than county, and I think
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
144
they should be involved in that jurisdiction. But trying to
draw that on this scale doesn't make any sense, so I think
you just put that into writing, and I think it needs to be
real clear as to where those boundaries are. Try to use
roads, footage, and subdivision boundaries as much as
possible.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Tell me again what this
buffer would do?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Out into the Kerrville South
23 area.
24
25
7-27-09
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: ETJ.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, out into the ETJ. The
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's down there in that
Kerrville South area more than any other area. If, say,
someone's going to build an apartment building on the north
side -- or south side of Lehmann Drive, I really think the
kitty -- I mean, the -- not the kitty, the City. The City
should be involved in that. I think they would -- maybe
that's not a good example. A bunch of patio homes, some high
density, the City needs to be involved in that. It's clearly
right next to the city services. I don't know whether that's
100 foot, 200 foot, 300 foot, but I think there's some
distance right along an area --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: From wherever the city
limits line is.
145
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
City has -- you know, and there's a few other spots that kind
of are like that, not a whole lot. But I just think that
those areas need to -- you know, to me, should be in the
City's jurisdiction, not the County's. But if it's in the
county, that's fine too. Like I say, that's up to the City.
I'm, in 55 minutes, meeting with the City Manager to kind of
give him this new map, hopefully, or get to it them shortly
thereafter, and I think go over whatever we decide to do
today and report on that so he can report the same to City
Council tomorrow night. But, like I said, the map, I think
we're pretty much -- pretty close. The agreement's going to
take a little bit of time for the two attorneys to work out.
JUDGE TINLEY: You've been in the loop on that,
Mr. Browning?
MR. BROWNING: On which part, sir? I am on some,
but not all.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're going to test my memory now,
aren't you?
MR. BROWNING: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's say the Creekwood area. Are
you familiar with that?
MR. BROWNING: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: 1,000, 2,000 foot buffer zone? That
seem to make sense to folks over there?
(Mr. Browning nodded.)
7-27-09
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
JUDGE TINLEY: Same over around -- on the west side
of 16?
MR. BROWNING: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: That potentially commercial area
over there. Those are the only two big areas, aren't they?
I COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Bear Creek, Area A. And
it's, you know --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, along the river.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's the part along the river;
the City would maintain all that jurisdiction, and it's just
a strip closer to the ETJ the County would -- terrain-wise.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Then it's also fairly close
to sewer.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, the City, that lower
area, and that boundary, that's probably the -- I won't say
it's the least important, but -- from my standpoint, but I
can see this argument for who should control that a little
bit more vague over there, because there have been some
pretty large developments like Saddlewood have gone in over
there, even though Saddlewood isn't on city services.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you're suggesting we
finalize the map as quickly as possible?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And let the two -- County
Attorney and City Attorney work out the interlocal agreement?
7-27-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
147
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Interlocal agreement, correct.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with that.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I like that.
JUDGE TINLEY: But incorporating these principles
that you've put into this handout.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Certainly incorporating those.
They have to be addressed, in my mind, in that agreement.
Now, not -- there may be a different way to look at it. I
really don't think a lot of those are -- they're not deal
breakers, in my mind. Other than the O.S.S.F.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Other than O.S.S.F. That's a
I deal breaker.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because that's a state law
thing. We just don't have an option.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We'd be violating state law.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And roads too.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The road standards are very,
very close right now. And -- and we have to look at that a
little bit. I mean, I think you may look at some of these,
depending on -- if there there's going to be truly a -- say a
Comanche Trace type development, and for whatever reason, the
City's not going to annex, but it's a high density
development, you know, our 60 foot right-of-way may be too
much. We may need -- you know, so I think we need to look at
some of these case-by-case, or come and get a variance from
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2 `i
148
the County.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. If you're going to do
curb and gutter, you don't need 60-foot right-of-ways.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. So -- but, anyway,
that's kind of where I think we are, and hopefully where
we're going. And, ideally, on Wednesday -- which I'm sure
this is on our agenda. I haven't really looked at it for our
joint meeting with City/County. Again, to me, that hopefully
we can finalize the map then, and then make sure that any
issues that are -- that need to be in the agreement are
brought up so that everyone's aware of that, but we're going
to try to iron out an agreement over here on Wednesday. I
think that's the time or the place. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any particular action you're seeking
from the Court today?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We probably should have an
action to approve this map from the standpoint of offering it
back to the City. I'll make a motion.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second for
approval of the new map to be submitted to the City. Further
question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1a
20
21
22
23
24
25
149
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY:
else you need?
The motion does carry. Anything
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Y'all be nice to him over there,
MR. BROWNING: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. That brings us, looks like,
to Item 29; consider, discuss, take appropriate action
regarding Court Compliance payment plans, who sets the plans,
who has authority to set them, when payments are made. I
don't suppose you want to be totally limited to that, but
generally those ballpark items; is that correct,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'll let you run with it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much. And my
comment is very, very simple, but I think there may be others
in the room, and I certainly don't want to -- I want to give
them the opportunity to talk about these things if they so
wish. But my comment is, last week there was -- there was
some question over who has the authority over the Compliance
office. And I'm -- I'm pretty clear, Commissioners Court has
authority over the Compliance office. So, that's it. All I
have to say about that. Do you want me to say more? I mean,
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
150
I can talk for 30, 40 minutes.
JUDGE TINLEY: Only if you feel like it,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I -- you know, my
concern was who has the authority, and I think, in visits
with a couple of people around, that -- and, I mean, my
mind's settled about that. So -- but there may be others
that -- Linda, do you want to address any of this? Are you
~ happy? Or --
10
11
12
13 Buster.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. UECKER: I -- well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. UECKER: I don't have any question either,
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. UECKER: The only question I had is, you know,
the -- the courts' desire, the three courts, of how the
payment plans were set up. Not who has authority over the
personnel part; I don't care about that. The only question I
had is how the -- the payments were applied on a payment
plan.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How do you feel about that
today?
MS. UECKER: Well, I don't know. What's happened?
I mean, is there -- is that going to change? Or --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, let me say this to
7-27-09
151
1 ~ you .
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. UECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know what will
change and what not will change, but in a segment coming up
when we have the liaison reports to the Court, I will talk
about where we're heading with this thing of, like, drawing
up some policies, some guidelines and those kinds of things.
We're -- that's coming very, very soon. And --
MS. UECKER: Okay. Good plan.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- we'll be doing -- yeah.
We'll be doing that. And that way, everybody will be clear
of how that office works and where the guidelines are,
whether -- where the little line is stepping across and
getting into trouble and those kinds of things. So, we're
going to get that established and we'll run it by everybody
before this Court --
MS. UECKER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- adopts it.
MS. UECKER: Well, I was just under the
understanding that some agreement had been reached last week,
I think, with Judge Williams. I mean, he came to see me
Friday and said, you know, everything's okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I had a long visit with
Judge Williams.
MS. UECKER: Okay.
7-27-09
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
152
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. Y'all have anything?
Okay, Judge. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's all you need?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's it. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else have anything to offer
on that?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think we probably ought to
have some other things to offer on this. I'm not -- I'm real
-- I think I'm understanding how this thing is supposed to
work and how it works by way of the statute, who the fee
officers are, and that being Jannett and Linda. They're the
only ones that can accept money legally for those fees. Our
Compliance office is not supposed to be taking any money.
Number one, they're not bonded. If they're handling money, I
think they're doing it outside the scope of their duties.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are y'all handling money?
MS. LYLE: Not at all.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why are we talking about it?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, because I don't want
that to become -- I don't want that to happen.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Me either. Neither do they.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. I just want to make
sure that that doesn't happen, because that's not what the --
what it was set up for. As far as them being under our
direction, that's fine with me, except one thing. I think
7-27-09
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
that whenever we set down guidelines or make guidelines and
policy for that office, we need to include those people that
are the fee officers in that policy-making part. They've
been collecting fees a lot longer than any of us. They've
been doing court compliance until we set -- that office was
established, however many years ago it was established, and
it just needs to be real clear about how you do that, how you
run that office. We don't want to put -- I know that Terry
doesn't want to get into a libelous position, get herself in
trouble. We don't want her to get into trouble, and we don't
want trouble either, so that's why -- and we need to do this
thing pretty quickly, before something were to happen. I
think there's been a couple of things that have happened
recently that brought this to light, and I think it needs to
be handled very quickly.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I'd like to know what
they are so we can get them corrected.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, I think that one of
them came up in executive session last meeting, which I'm not
going to divulge --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- what went on in that,
because it would be unethical.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. I appreciate
that.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
154
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: But, you know, it just needs
to be etched in stone how that office operates, who they
answer to directly, and who makes sure that they're following
through with the policy and procedures of that office.
You're dealing with some -- indirectly, we're dealing with
some pretty good people that have gotten in trouble, who are
trying to do the right thing. And indirectly, we are dealing
through them -- or dealing directly with them that are not
good character people. And there are times when that
office -- I feel like it could be -- there could be some
danger involved. We need to be careful. Policy can dictate
a lot of that, and so the sooner we do this, the better.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, as I understood your
comment, your proposal is to work on a set of policies
including input from the various stakeholders involved, fee
officers?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: Persons involved in the process?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Correct.
JUDGE TINLEY: And then bring that policy back and
present to it this Court for implementation?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, absolutely.
JUDGE TINLEY: Seems like a logical place to go at
this point. Okay. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Appreciate your input,
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
155
Bruce.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're welcome.
JUDGE TINLEY: I think that's all I've got on the
list of agenda items, unless I went to sleep somewhere during
the meeting. Let's go to Section 4, payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let's see. I'd like to make
a motion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Get at it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to pay the
bills. Question or discussion on the motion? Question. Who
is Pioneer Research Corporation?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What?
JUDGE TINLEY: Pioneer Research Corporation, jail
repairs, solutions. And it's also over in juvenile
detention, isn't it? Shows up twice.
23 Califor
24
25
7-27-09
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What do they do?
MR. BOLLIER: Sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MR. BOLLIER: Who are they?
JUDGE TINLEY: Who are they?
MR. BOLLIER: They come out of -- they come out of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2U
21.
22.
23
24
25
156
MR. BOLLIER: They -- they sell cleaning solutions
and all that good stuff.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, it's solutions as in material,
not answers to problems.
MR. BOLLIER: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Answer to a dirty problem.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Unless you have to scrub
the problem. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I just noted that that's a pretty
nice -- pretty nice -- they must have good stuff.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Nieman Marcus of cleaning
supplies.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, 670 bucks worth for the jail.
MR. BOLLIER: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's a long-lasting supply, I
~ hope .
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Organic too, probably, Judge.
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: California.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: California and organic.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, you answered my question. Any
7-27-09
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
Historical Commission. About halfway down.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I forgot to look. I've
forgotten how much money we actually put in that budget for
supplies and travel and those kinds of things, but it's kind
of rare to actually see it used. And I see three here all at
one time.
JUDGE TINLEY: There's been a few in the past,
reimbursements.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Here and there, but this one
here -- and, actually, what I think it is, I think the
Commission itself is getting a lot more active in doing some
other things.
JUDGE TINLEY: I believe you're right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But one here is
reimbursement for a camera. Do you think that we bought a
camera for Historical Commission?
MS. HARGIS: They bought a camera, yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, good. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it was 3,500,
Commissioner, if I'm --
JUDGE TINLEY: 35 or 45. Asked for 6,000, 7,000.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Asked for 6,000; I think we
approved 3,500.
MS. HARGIS: Either 2,500 or 3,500.
7-27-09
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
158
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it's 35, but I don't
that, I'm not. Right?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. That's all,
thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: And just below there, you'll note
that the Youth Exhibit Center was a customer of Pioneer
Research Corporation also.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Dang sure was.
JUDGE TINLEY: I'm telling you, that's a hot outfit
out of California.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Solutions.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Why do you have to go all the
way to California to get cleaning --
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else? 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 does carry. We got budget
amendments. Oh, do we have budget amendments. We have 42
budget amendments.
7-27-09
159
1.
G
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
AUDIENCE: Oh my gosh.
JUDGE TINLEY: One of which is mine.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You and the grape jelly jar.
Did you run out of money?
MS. HARGIS: There are -- Juvenile Detention just
kind of rearranged his whole schedule so that that takes him
till the end of the year, so that's one of the reasons
there's so many there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah, looks like 5 through 20.
MS. HARGIS: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: He just reworked --
MS. HARGIS: He did an analysis of his accounts and
moved them where he knew he was going to need the money, so
he's done for the year. So, he believes he'll actually not
need any additional money, even though his revenue will go
over. And you'll actually have 12,000 left, is what he's
showing, so he's going to make it through the end of the year
without having to actually, you know, use -- allocate
additional revenues.
JUDGE TINLEY: And he will pass his revenue --
MS. HARGIS: He's past his revenue.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- budget forecast this month?
MS. HARGIS: With the check that's in the bills to
be paid, he lacked $5,000. He'll be over.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 ~~
2U
21
22
23
24
25
160
MS. HARGIS: He'll probably be over about $150,000
in revenue.
JUDGE TINLEY: I was thinking maybe 100.
MS. HARGIS: About 150.
JUDGE TINLEY: I like your figure better.
MS. HARGIS: Well --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: On some of these, I see the
letters F-I-C-A. Is that FICA?
', MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm. That happens a lot, too.
When we have employees that we had overtime, and we may not
have used the overtime, so we have more FICA in there. So,
his are, you know, just kind of moving things around.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Two different departments, I
saw. Knothead there did it, too.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Knothead?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Sheriff.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. No, not the Sheriff.
(Laughter.)
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you, Buster.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's who I thought you were
talking about.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Mine's square. It's not
knothead; it's square.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're square head, he's
blockhead. Knothead. Sorry, guys. That is not very nice,
7-27-09
161
1
L
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and you know that I desire to be a nice person.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, right.
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: While we're speaking of being nice,
Linda, you're -- I'm sure your comment earlier today being
I
with the ATM machine was meant to be humorous, but can you
', back that up?
MS. UECKER: You bet I can.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. UECKER: About the lawyers?
JUDGE TINLEY: I want to see a summary of all your
insufficient checks, irrespective of whether or not they
~ were --
MS. UECKER: I think there's --
JUDGE TINLEY: -- ever paid or not.
MS. UECKER: There's a privacy issue.
JUDGE TINLEY: Huh? No. If they were county funds
coming in, there's no privacy issue there.
MS. UECKER: It wasn't one of yours, if that's what
you're worried about.
JUDGE TINLEY: I just want to see if anybody
besides -- according to your allegation, I just -- I just
want you to establish what you said, or maybe say, "I didn't
mean it." (Laughter.) Pay your money, take your choice.
MS. UECKER: What do you want, a list of lawyers
7-27-09
162
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: No, I want a list of all of your
MS. UECKER: Oh.
JUDGE TINLEY: Your statement was very global.
MS. UECKER: I told you that I hardly ever get any.
JUDGE TINLEY: You've never taken an insufficient
check from a convicted felon. The only -- only hot checks
that you'd ever received were from lawyers.
MS. UECKER: That's not what I said. I said most
of them are from lawyers.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Most of them.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll get the record. Okay, we'll
bring it back.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe you have a convicted
felon who thinks he's a lawyer.
JUDGE TINLEY: Could be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's not a lot of
difference in there. What is -- when we talk about travel,
now, is that -- is that mileage? Are there some hotel rooms
and meals and stuff like that involved in that?
MS. HARGIS: Yes. It's not just mileage; it's
usually reimbursement for the hotel, the food. Some people
~, have only one line item. They pay their conferences out of
one line item, and travel is the only other line item they
7-27-09
"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
163
have, and that's what they pay for the accommodations and the
food. So, you can't -- it just depends. Some people have
more than one line item; some of them only have two.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Should be out-of-county
travel.
MS. HARGIS: Yes. Oh, we watch that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The -- being as this is
I public information, I'm going to use Ag Extension as an
example. They obviously use all of their travel --
I', MS. HARGIS: They do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- money, and now want more.
Do you think -- do you think that they will continue
traveling? Or will they stop for the year and realize that
they're going over budget? How does that work? Do you talk
to them, or do you counsel with them? Do you pull a gun on
them?
MS. HARGIS: No, sir, I don't pull a gun on them.
But based on our last Commissioners Court meeting -- and I
can't remember her name.
MS. HYDE: Laurinda.
MS. HARGIS: Laurinda said they were going to
another out-of-state meet with these kids because they're
winning, and so I'm assuming that perhaps because the kids
are winning the contests, they're going up, and they didn't
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
164
budget for all of that. They have a lot of travel. That's
-- as long as they have some money somewhere else, they have
to stop buying something else. When they reach the end, then
they're going to have to come here and ask, 'cause I'm not
giving them any more money.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's exactly the right
answer, thank you. And there's a couple of those. I just
picked on the Ag Extension people 'cause they're not here.
JUDGE TINLEY: When you get a call from Mobile,
Alabama, saying, "We got no money to get home," what are you
going to tell them, Buster?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See you Christmas.
MS. HARGIS: Use your own credit card and get home.
We will probably have -- we're going to try to watch these
every two weeks all the way up to the end of the year.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I move we approve the budget
amendments as presented.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second, but I'm looking for
a total.
I JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and second to
approve the budget amendments as presented.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If you can find a total
anywhere, Buster, I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there a total here?
25 ~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: No.
~-27-oa
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
165
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: There's not one.
MS. HARGIS: No, because they're different
s. There's a total on each department, if you
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, on the very first one,
Maintenance Department, the total is 1,562?
MS. HARGIS: No, that's how much is left in there.
We didn't give a total. If you would like a total, we'll
give you a total of all the debits and credits. We did not
do that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I was just wondering.
I think, you know, anybody in here from the public that's
interested in that kind of thing, how we spend their money,
should have the right to see it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments on
the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising
your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion carried. Do you have any
late bills?
MS. HARGIS: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Monthly reports. I've been
presented with monthly reports from District Clerk; Kerr
7-27-09
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
County Payroll Expenses, June 2009; Kerr County Treasurer,
June 2009; and Constable, Precinct 3. Do I hear a motion to
' approve these reports as presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the named reports as presented. Questions 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.)
I! JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Reports
from Commissioners in their liaison or other designated
capacities. Commissioner Oehler?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think I'll just defer my
time to Commissioner Baldwin. He seems like he missed out
this morning.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll take it. The -- may I?
JUDGE TINLEY: Surely, yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Court Compliance office,
we are in the process -- I asked them to contact some other
court compliance offices around the state, as well as their
association, which is called CCAT.
MS. LYLE: GOAT.
7-27-09
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
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: GOAT. And they have done
that. And we've asked them to send us their policies so we
can kind of get an idea of how they do things. Some of
the -- some of the things that they are -- says is okay,
we're not going to -- we're not going to go there, because
there's -- there's -- I know there's got to be liability in
that thing somewhere. So, we're going to be very, very
careful with what -- but it's going to be a starting point.
We're going to get their rules and regulations in there and
get started on it, and we're going to sit down, draw it, and
the honorable County Attorney and I will sit down and work on
this thing and try to come up with something that's good for
all, and we'll run it across the County and District Clerk,
the County Court at Law Judge, which is really the father of
this whole thing, both District Judges, and anybody else that
really cares about it, and before we bring it into
Commissioners Court for adoption, and we'll make it as tight
as we possibly can. I don't know -- do you guys want to add
anything to all that? Basically, --
MS. LYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- that's what we're doing.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No. No, sir. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
7-27-09
1
7
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
168
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Couple things, Judge.
First, I mentioned during the dog discussion earlier we had
some park improvements in the works, some picnic tables. We
got a few bucks -- according to the Auditor, we have a few
dollars we didn't spend this year. Correct? And, trying to
make this a two-phase improvement plan, it would require a
few dollars in next year's budget, not a lot. Talking about
picnic tables, the precast concrete ones. And I've been
I' working with Mr. Bollier about costs, and we think we can
bring those in at about -- $1,000 a unit, Tim?
MR. BOLLIER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Acquisition of a table and
benches and the pad and so forth.
MR. BOLLIER: And concrete slab, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: To work on the pads. We've
gone through the lower section of the park and spotted about
10 places we think those would be good, all nice shaded
places where people can enjoy picnics. The Court may
remember -- Bruce, you may not because you weren't on the
Court when we did it, but a few years back, there were a
whole bunch of benches that were in San Antonio that were the
property of VIA, and they were getting rid of those benches,
and the Court agreed we'd send a letter up there and pick up
a whole lot of those things. We have about 14 to 16 of
them --
7-27-09
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
MR. BOLLIER: Eighteen total, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- out on the Road and
Bridge lot. A couple of them have deteriorated pretty badly,
but we're going to select the better ones. If you need a
couple at Ingram, tell us. And Tim's going to refurbish
them, paint them, make them in good shape, and spot them
around the park as well. And your park, if you --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How heavy are they?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Concrete?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A thousand pounds, maybe?
Less than that? There's three pieces, right?
MR. BOLLIER: The benches -- just the benches?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The bench and the two
~ pedestals.
MR. BOLLIER: I would say they're a good --
probably going to weigh a good 500 pounds. I don't know
about 1,000.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: At Ingram, we got a bunch of
water that comes through there; there's not any place to put
them. We can get flooded.
MR. BOLLIER: I don't know how much they weigh.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If you got a problem, you
don't need them or want them.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I just don't think they'd
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
170
stay there, but they might. I'd try one just to experiment.
Maybe that would encourage a flood.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Huh?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Maybe that would encourage a
flood. (Laughter.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Whatever works.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If that's what it --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: If that works, we'll all
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: If that's what it takes,
you can have all of them. So, we're going to be doing that.
I do want to talk a little bit about a couple of sewer
projects and bring the Court up to speed. On the Kerrville
South project, we're still having problems with easements on
the Ranchero Road side. The owner of Oak Grove Mobile Home
Park is taking his time. I guess communications from San
Clemente, California to Kerrville are kind of difficult these
days, and he's taking his time about getting it back to us
what he would think the value of three or four laterals
coming from the Ranchero properties through his property,
what that might be worth. So, we're working on that.
We're also working on how to acquire easements on
what will be the north side of that fence that separates Oak
Grove Mobile Home Park from the properties on Ranchero Road.
We've sent out certified letters to all the property owners
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1 E3
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
171
on Ranchero Road seeking some input in terms what their
thoughts are on this process. To date, I've had two phone
calls. There are eight properties. Judge, you remember we
sent them out, 'cause you signed them all. I haven't had a
great deal of response. We got an issue we're going to have
to try to resolve, and I don't want it to come to eminent
domain, but if it has to come to eminent domain, I'll come
back to the Court and we'll talk about what that's all about.
We need some surveying. That surveying's going to get under
way. We'll try to establish what we think is a reasonable
value for easements on the north side of Oak Grove Mobile
Home Park fence, so keep you posted on that.
In terms of Center Point, our Category A planning
is back on the T.W.D.B.'s desk for approval. It was sent
back to us with one issue that we had to address and get
under -- get some answers to it, and that had to do with
mobile home type dwellings. And T.W.D.B.'s raising the
question of how many of those are permanent and how many of
them have wheels and can go someplace else, and they don't
want to be spending money on those if they're here today and
gone tomorrow. So, we went back and we assessed the way to
do that. The acceptable way to do that, according to Water
Development people, was to take a look at the -- the
electrical meters, and they'll accept a permanent hookup as
being one having an electrical meter. Bottom line is, we
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 "1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
172
contacted Bandera Electric and KPUB, and the total number of
mobile home parcels that they are willing to accept has been
reduced down from 209 to 60, bringing the total of
EDAP-eligible households to 612, still a sizable number. The
total number of sewer-using parcels in the -- in the whole
project was 892. So, that information has gone back to Water
Development Board. We expect them to sign off. Work has
begun on the B section of the plan, and keep you posted.
That's about it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just working on the ETJ.
That's about it.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got a meeting here in 20
~ minutes?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. And on Thursday -- not
Thursday, Wednesday at 3:30, I'll have a -- be over at
U.G.R.A. talking to them about regional water planning. The
board has requested a presentation. So, I may have to bow
out of the City/County meeting early if it runs long.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That might be a good thing.
JUDGE TINLEY: For whom?
25 I COMMISSIONER LETZ: Won't say.
7-27-09
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
173
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Judge, I got one thing that I
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that all you got, Jon?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm done.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Wednesday at 5:30, I'm
meeting with the residents on the Hoot Owl Hollow bridge
project, and Mike Coward's going to be there. We're going to
have a little -- a little meeting down by the bridge with all
the affected property owners there that actually have
property that punch the bridge. I'm not sure we're going to
have to acquire right-of-way, but -- and I do have a current
survey from Mr. Voelkel showing the bridge located on the
plat, so that we now know where the property lines are. And
all that seemed to be up in the air for years, but we finally
have that, so that's going on Wednesday. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. Elected officials?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just the jail status report.
JUDGE TINLEY: You got 15 seconds.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay -- 30. As of 1 o'clock
this afternoon, jail population was 104.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Wow.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say it again?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 104.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, ho.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: We have 22 that are sentenced
7-27-09
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
174
to serve county jail time out of that 104. We have 12
waiting to go to T.D.C. I have 9 with in excess of 100 days,
and everybody else is down to less than 100 days. The direct
file system is working fabulously, something I hope we all
stay committed to keep it going. I think Linda and everybody
is.
JUDGE TINLEY: We'll give you all the time you want
in future meetings for reports like that.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Those reports I'll give you.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Especially when he talks
about reduction of staff.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Wrong. That will be a longer
meeting there, Bruce.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty --
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other elected official --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask him a question
real quick. The direct file program, is that -- is that
going to cause us to hire somebody later on? I mean, how are
we doing with our prosecutors and sitting judges and all
that?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I can't tell you with the
prosecutors, okay. What y'all did last Commissioners Court,
changing one of my part-times to a full-time, took care of my
part of it, and I think that person, once we really get them
going and trained, will also be able to help the D.A.'s
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
175
offices. Hopefully they can come over and maybe help and
learn some of Linda's. But right now, we just have to see,
you know, how it goes. I think with it occurring daily,
almost, that it won't really be too bad a backlog to have.
MS. UECKER: Well, I think y'all actually took care
of that with the prosecutors, 'cause wasn't the last
23
24
25 200, ar
7-27-09
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: From 180 to 190 to 104.
Assistant D.A. that you put on mostly for that purpose?
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
MS. UECKER: And I think we're kind of finally all,
you know, on the same level. We're all working together and
we got it all going. Rusty and I agreed on some different
forms. And, I mean, we're -- it's more work for us, but not
enough that I think I can, you know, justify another person.
I don't want to do that. But it's -- I think it's working.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's all finally gelling. It
took most of this year, as you know, but it's all finally
starting to come together, and the jail and everybody's
learning each other's parts, and it's moving.
MS. UECKER: And we had to convince some folks
that, yeah, it's a good idea and, you know, let's just --
let's try it and see. And I think they're -- they can see
now what the result is.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
176
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's incredible.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I've got four other ones on
top of that that are still ours. But, like, three are at
North Texas State Hospital; one's in another county jail with
our charges that we're still waiting now that he's already
been sentenced. But, I mean, 104 in-house is -- that's been
-- that's fabulous.
JUDGE TINLEY: Now that we've processed this
backlog, the system that is in place, you know, that took
care of that, is it going to have to remain as active as it
has been these last few months in order to maintain this type
of headway?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. I don't see that you
can -- you can slow it down. I think you're going to have to
continue it.
MS. UECKER: That's the key to it, is staying
ahead.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah.
MS. UECKER: It's like, you know, we go -- I send
two folks out to the jail every Friday morning. Judge
Sherrill is out there, and one of the special prosecutors
that y'all approved does all the cases, all the felonies,
I' regardless of what court it falls in. He takes care of a lot
of the stuff out there with those folks that are in custody,
every Friday morning.
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1 '7
18
la
20
21
22
23
24
25
177
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And if it got down to -- if
it got down to, like, the Judge would just hear one, y'all
still want to continue that, even if it's just one person
that comes in?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. UECKER: I don't think that would ever get to
that, because -- depends on how many arrests were made, you
know, that week.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, the only other thing, to
change the subject just a little bit, Rex got our Attorney
General's opinion back on whether I can get rid of the old
DWI video room that we used to have to have, and they have
agreed that we can do that now. So, with some remodeling,
hopefully we can do it in the budget or whatever, one room
out there, we can set up a permanent room for your court
video teleconferencing where we can give the inmates the
privacy with the client-attorney privilege and that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What I have --
JUDGE TINLEY: Video teleconferencing.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: So, I think that will also
speed up even more when we can give them that kind of access
to where they can have the privacy and have a designated
area. So, I think we're on the right track. I really -- you
know, not letting people out of jail that need to be out of
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1 'a
20
21
22
23
24
25
178
jail, but actually processing and getting through the court
system in a timely manner.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, are you housing any
out-of-county or federal prisoners?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, I'm not housing any
out-of-county except for some that we get once in a while
that are -- you know, just get arrested on the street. Now,
there has been some issues come up. I know Bandera's fixing
to open theirs if they can get the staffing for it.
Gillespie County is trying to contract with housing at least
20 or 30 over there, but Gillespie County may be in a dire
situation come this jail inspection. It's -- it's a
possibility that they could order that jail shut, and if they
do, then those officers that arrest people at night over
there are going to have to have some place to go. Now, I
have a contract; I just haven't been housing, but we may have
to try and -- I'd rather help our surrounding counties than I
would do anything else.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was just wondering, mainly
'cause I was just talking to the Judge Advocates the other
day, and is there still a market for that? Or --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I haven't heard much about it.
The one time right after I took office, I checked into
housing federal inmates, and I -- we were talking about
housing Texas federal inmates. I didn't want to house them
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2 ~0
21
22
23
24
25
179
if -- the only problem I had is the U.S. Marshal's office,
part of our agreement back then was going to pay us, like,
$75 -- $50, $75 a day, but they wanted us to do all the
transporting back and forth to the federal courthouse in San
Antonio, and I couldn't do that, couldn't agree. I would
never -- I didn't have that kind of manpower, so our contract
with them never came through.
JUDGE TINLEY: They weren't going to reimburse you
any additional amount for transporting?
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, it was all in that fee.
That was years ago. I just dropped it then and never ever
looked at it again.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is Bandera County going to be
the same cost we have, basically, or are they going to try
to --
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I haven't asked them what
they're going to charge in Gillespie County.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I don't think he's made up
his mind. They haven't.
SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: But we could get back into
housing out-of-county if this -- if this continues. I don't
want to do it immediately, 'cause I'm just not sure -- you
know, I'm comfortable that it's been going down. The direct
file system's working, but I'd really like to give it a
little bit more and really believe it before I take some
7-27-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
180
out-of-county inmates and start making us a little bit of
money, and then have to say no, get them back out.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very smart.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other elected officials?
Department heads? Kibitzers? Sweaters?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nobody cares.
JUDGE TINLEY: Interlopers? (Laughter.) Guess
not. Here's your chance. We'll be adjourned.
(Commissioners Court was adjourned at 2:47 p.m.)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
,- n
BY: _
_ __ ~~Z~ _ ____ _
Kathy anik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
22
23
24
25
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 31st day of July, 2009.
7-27-09
ORDER NO. 31367
INSTALLATION OF ATM MACHINE
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 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 installation of an ATM machine on the first floor lobby of the Courthouse.
ORDER NO. 31368
QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT FROM PATTERSON AND ASSOCIATES
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Acknowledge receipt of the Quarterly Investment Report from Patterson and Associates
for the quarter ending June 30, 2009.
ORDER NO. 31369
LEASH LAW RULES FOR FLAT ROCK LAKE PARK
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
3-1-0 to: (Commissioner Baldwin voted nay)
Approve animals to be on leash at all times in the lower section of Flat Rock Lake Park,
and animals may be off leash in the upper east section only of Flat Rock Lake Park (east
of Third Creek), as long as they are supervised by and under the direct control of the
owner, with Animal Control to bring a progress report back to the Court at the end of 60
days.
ORDER NO. 31370
AMEND PLAT FOR LOTS 9 AND 10 OF SLEEPY HOLLOW, SECTION TWO
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0 to:
Approve Amendment to Plat for Lots 9 and 10 of Sleepy Hollow, Section Two, Vol. 4,
Page 224, located in Precinct 4, pursuant to section 6.07(a)(1)(6) of Subdivision Rules
and Regulations.
ORDER NO. 31371
REMOVAL OF CATTLE GUARDS ON WILSON CREEK ROAD
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 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 removal of the cattle guards on Wilson Creek Road.
ORDER NO. 31372
PURCHASE OF USED FEMA TRAILER
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Approve the Road & Bridge Department purchasing a used FEMA trailer, in the amount
of $3,000.00, from the Texas Facilities Commission Federal Surplus Property Program,
with the funds to come from Line Item 15-611-575.
ORDER NO. 31373
ACCEPT MIRA VISTA LANE N. IN THE RANCHES OF SUNSET RIDGE
SUBDIVISION FOR COUNTY MAINTENANCE, AND RELEASE MAINTENANCE
BOND #5050114
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 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 acceptance of Mira Vista Lane N. in The Ranches of Sunset Ridge Subdivision
for County maintenance, and release the Maintenance Bond #5050114 in the amount of
$88,681.28.
ORDER NO. 31374
EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN FOR INGRAM LAKE DAM
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Accept proposal from John Hewitt for the Emergency Action Plan for Ingram Lake Dam,
located in Precinct 4, for $4,000.00 to meet TCEQ's requirements, funds to come from
Flood Control Line Item 15-611-459.
ORDER NO. 31375
BIDS FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HVAC AND PEST CONTROL
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Approve the Maintenance Supervisor going out for bids for electrical, plumbing, HVAC
and pest control services.
ORDER NO. 31376
GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION TELEPHONE SERVICE AGREEMENT
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Approve the Inmate Telephone Service Agreement with Global Tel*Link Corporation.
ORDER NO. 31377
RENEWAL OF TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY INTERLOCAL
COOPERATION CONTRACT
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 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:
Approve renewing the Texas Department of Public Safety Interlocal Cooperation
Contract.
ORDER NO. 31378
AMENDED BYLAWS/RESOLUTION OF LIBRARY BOARD
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Oehler, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0 to:
Approve adopting the Amended Bylaws/Resolution of dealing with membership and
duties of the Library Board as adopted by the Library Advisory Board.
ORDER NO. 31379
DISASTER/EMERGENCY EMPLOYEE POLICY
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Approve the proposed Disaster/Emergency Employee Policy which allows
reimbursement for employees during disasters as permitted by State and Federal
Regulations.
ORDER NO. 31380
RETURN CHECK TO HILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY MHMR ON CSU
ROAD/PARKING LOT PROJECT
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 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 returning the check number 208035 dated June 11, 2009 in the amount of
$7,270.00 to the Hill Country Community MHMR on CSU road/parking lot project.
ORDER NO. 313 81
LETTER OF SUPPORT TO LCRA ON BEHALF OF TIERRA LINDA VOLUNTEER
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Approve writing a Letter of Support to LCRA on behalf of the Tierra Linda Volunteer
Fire Department for their grant request to help purchase a new 2,000 gallon tanker truck.
ORDER NO. 31382
DECLARE PERSONAL PROPERTY AS SURPLUS IN THE COUNTY CLERK'S
OFFICE
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 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 declaring certain personal property as surplus, and authorize the County Clerk
to trade out the used Micro Film Equipment, Item Nos. 1, 2 & 3, for services of scanning
old records, and for disposing of the remaining Item Nos. 4, 5 & 6 (calculators,
typewriter and ballot joggers.
ORDER N0.31383
ETJ AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF KERRVILLE
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Approve the new map showing amended boundaries to be submitted to the City of
Kerrville.
ORDER NO. 31384
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, came to be considered by the Court
various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	190,654.20
15-Road & Bridge	$	83,445.96
16-2008 Capital Projects	$	19,668.00
19-Public Library	$	33,333.33
21-Title IV-3	$	1,238.96
23-Juvenile State Aid Fund	$	498.42
27-Juv Intensive Prog-State	$	5,070.00
31-Parks	$	1,284.09
50-Indigent Health Care	$	12,006.57
76-Juv Detention Facility	$	4,836.06
83-216th District Attorney	$	1,745.92
86-216th CSWCD	$	452.26
87-Community Service	$	271.04
TOTAL $ 354,504.81
Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts.
ORDER NO. 31385
BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 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 paying the Budget Amendment Nos. 1-42 as presented.
ORDER NO. 31386
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 27th day of July, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Approve the Monthly Reports from:
District Clerk
Kerr County Payroll Expenses for June 2009
Kerr County Treasurer for June 2009
Constable Pct #3