1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Regular Session
Monday, June 8, 2009
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge
H.A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4

V
c~
O
.~
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I N D E X
June 8, 2009
PAGE
--- Commissioners' Comments 5
1.1 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
request from Marvin Willis for use of Flat Rock
Lake on August 22, 2009, for 7th Annual Guadalupe
River Parade 9
1.2 Presentation of TAC Safety Award to Kerr County --
1.3 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
provide funding for Kerr County's portion of
Phase 2 match of airport project in the amount
of $75,000 11
1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
plans enlarging the Kerr County War Memorial 17
1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
resolution concerning LCRA proposed transmission
line 21
1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
review and accept concept plan for Uvalde Gin
Tract off Goat Creek Cutoff Road, Pct. 4 28
1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
accept maintenance bond for Mo Ranch Road for
one year, Pct. 4 44
1.8 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
set public hearing for revision of plat for	
Headwaters Phase 3, Pct. 4	45
1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
remove cattle guards on Wilson Creek Road,	
Pct. 2 and Pct. 3	46
1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to	
approve audit of basic financial statements	
and supplementary information for year ended	
September 30, 2008	51
1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on	
agreement between Kerrville Independent School	
District and Kerr County Juvenile Facility to	
provide educational services to juveniles housed	
at that facility	65
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I N D E X (Continued)
June 8, 2009
PAGE
1.12 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to
adopt an order, based on burn ban status,
prohibiting the sale or use of restricted
fireworks; i.e., skyrockets with sticks and
missiles with fins, in any portion of the
unincorporated area of Kerr County 67
1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on
reviewing status of interlocal agreement with
City of Kerrville concerning subdivision rules
and regulations in the ETJ 70
4.1 Pay Bills 74
4.2 Budget Amendments --
4.3 Late Bills 80
4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 82
5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee
Assignments 87
5.2 Reports from Elected Officials/Department Heads 89
1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action
regarding personnel issue (executive session) 92
Adjourned 93
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Monday, June 8, 2009, at 9:00 a.m., a regular
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in
the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse,
Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in
open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the
Kerr County Commissioners Court posted and scheduled for this
time and date, Monday, June 8, 2009, at 9 a.m. It is that
time now. Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Would you stand,
have a word of prayer with me, and followed by the pledge of
allegiance.
(Prayer and pledge of allegiance.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Be seated, please. At
this time, if there's any member of the public that has any
matter they wish to bring to the Court's attention that is
not a listed agenda item, now is your opportunity to tell us
what -- 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
located at the rear of the room. There should be some there.
If not, or if we happen to get to an agenda item and you
haven't filled out a participation form and decide you do
want to be heard, get my attention in some manner and I'll
6-8-09
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
see that you do have that opportunity. But right now, if
there's any member of the public that wishes to be heard on
any matter that is not a listed agenda item, this is your
opportunity to come forward and tell us what's on your mind.
MR. EMERSON: Judge, I'd like to take a moment,
please. This is Denise Kadirhan; she's an intern in our
office, where we partnered up with Schreiner University again
working with Christine Martinez out there, and I believe
she's a junior at Schreiner, and she'll be helping us out
until the end of summer. So, just wanted to introduce her to
the Court.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Welcome aboard.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Welcome.
MS. KADIRHAN: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? Let's move on, then.
Commissioner Baldwin, what do you have for us this morning?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I wanted to bring up a
couple of things. I have recently received two phone calls,
e-mails regarding Flat Rock Lake.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Listening.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: One that we have locked the
old park to -- to automobile traffic, and a gentleman wants
to go, and his wife can't walk very far, so he wants to be
able to drive in there. And I was -- was making a speech at
25 ~ the Inn of the Hills the other day, and that question came
6-8-09
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
up, and I really don't know why we have it locked, and so
somebody needs to explain that. And then I get an e-mail
this morning, basically the same kind of thing, only on the
lower end. We have a bridge there, and isn't that open --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- to the public? And so
that's going to be easily answered. It is open, okay. Very
~ good.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was an affirmative
nod, since I can't speak.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, okay. I can read it.
Thank you very much. Also, this Thursday on the front lawn
of the courthouse is dinner on the grounds, our second dinner
on the grounds this Thursday, the 11th, from 12:00 to 1:00.
And there is going to be a country and western band out
there. It's my two favorite kinds of music, country and
western, and we're going to be out there. Clay Barton -- our
own Clay Barton is going to front the band, do all that old
Merle Haggard stuff that he does so well. And the
three-piece band that will be behind him, one of them is a
member of the Grand Old Opry, and the other two should be.
Excellent, excellent musicians, and it's going to be -- it's
going to be exceptional. So, this Thursday, dinner on the
grounds, and bring your picnic lunch and your drink and --
and enjoy your courthouse and visiting with friends. That's
6-8-09

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
all, Judge. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I noted with interest,
Commissioner, that George Strait just visited Jerry Jones'
new billion dollar stadium in Arlington or wherever it is
located. When's he going to visit Buster Baldwin's new lawn
down here in Kerr County?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's going to have to get
better than he is. These guys are good.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I was with the AACOG
people, and we went to Colorado for a National Association of
Regional Councils meeting and stayed there three days. Came
back a day early, 'cause I've never been to a meeting so
green in my life. You talk about things that are in the
future that are emanating out of Washington. There's a lot
of that greenhouse gas stuff going on, and a lot of folks are
gearing up to catalog it and do something about it. So, this
came out of, however, one of the more interesting sessions
which was conducted by national census -- United States
Census people, just a little toy you can play with. You can
find out the population of every state in the United States,
median age, home values, gross rent values, income, how many
below-poverty, whole bit. You can do the whole thing. All
50 states are on there, so you -- in your spare time, when
you have nothing else to do, you can play with that little
6-8-09
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
wheel and you can learn something. The other thing, Judge,
is that we've been discussing for some time, both
face-to-face and through chains of communications with the
owner of Oak Grove Mobile Home Park with respect to easements
we need for completion of Phase IV of the Kerrville South
wastewater project. We had a meeting this week. The County
Attorney assigned Ilse Bailey to assist me in that meeting.
It was at the owner's legal -- his lawyer's office, and we
discussed all the various options. Haven't got a resolution,
but the meeting took place, and that -- that, in and of
itself, is positive. So, when I get some word back as to
their official position, I'll have it on the agenda for a
more in-depth discussion.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think I have anything
this morning, other than we had a total of about -- little
bit of rain, but we need a lot more. We had about two and a
half inches, more or less, in the -- since the last meeting
in the eastern part of the county, but it came in small
little spurts, which was good, but it also meant that a lot
of it didn't get underneath the cedar trees. They pretty
much absorbed a good part of it. That's it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler?
6-8-09
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, the main report out in
my area is not quite as good this time as it was in yours.
Last time I got more; this time you were more fortunate. It
was requested by two of the out west fire departments to put
the burn ban back on, so I did that this morning. It is
green, but it's drying out. Going to be in the 90's this
week, and the wind is kicking up and the grass is drying, so
I went ahead and did it at their request. So, I guess I'll
be getting phone calls, 'cause when you got green grass,
people want to burn.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's -- that's enough.
JUDGE TINLEY: All-righty. Let's get on with the
business at hand. First item on our agenda is to consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action on a request from Marvin
Willis for use of Flat Rock Lake on August 22nd, 2009, for
the 7th annual Guadalupe River Parade. Mr. Willis?
MR. WILLIS: Yes, sir. That's exactly what it says
there. I'd like to have the park again on the 22nd of August
for the river parade. And, of course, we'd like to have you
guys all attend again and enjoy yourselves. I think it's
going to be bigger this year than last year. You saw how big
it was last year. So, sure like to get you guys involved
also, if there was anything that the County wanted to do at
that parade, you know, other than just riding on the float.
6-8-09
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
10
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Going to get the Judge on
MR. WILLIS: Drinking free beer, you know. So, you
know, it's going to be a great parade, you know, like I said.
So, you know, we'd like to get you guys all to come, if we
can have it, of course.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Only caveat, Marvin, would
be to be sure that your people clean up.
MR. WILLIS: Oh, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When they finish whatever
it is they're doing.
MR. WILLIS: You bet.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move approval of
your request.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion on the
motion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I just wanted to say that if
I gain three more pounds, I'll be a float. (Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can I ride on you?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Absolutely.
MR. WILLIS: We had a bathtub last year, so it
wouldn't be much different than that.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does seem to be getting a little bit
6-8-09
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
larger every year. And you guys, as part of that whole event
preceding the parade and so forth, do a big cleanup campaign,
get a lot of folks involved and call attention to the need to
keep our river clean and keep the debris out of it, and I
think -- I think it's a good effort on your part, and we
appreciate it, Marvin.
MR. WILLIS: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other 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.
j (No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank you.
I don't see Mr. Boccaccio here, so we will pass the second
item. Let's go to Item 3; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to provide funding for Kerr County's
portion of the Phase 2 match of the airport project in the
amount of $75,000. I put this on the agenda. As I'm sure
the Court is aware, we have stepped up the timetable for the
beginning of Phase 2 out at the airport property. Phase 1 is
almost complete, and the beginning of Phase 2, I am told now,
probably somewhere first to middle of August they will be
calling for the money, TexDOT will, for -- for the
City/County portion of the match. It seems that of the total
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
12
amount of approximately $400,000, there's 250 in reserves,
leaving 150. The City has on their agenda and has previously
committed, at least indirectly, $75,000 out of their general
fund in order to accomplish their portion of it, so I put
this on the agenda in order to put that before us so that we
can take the appropriate action if it's appropriate at this
time. You got any thoughts on that, Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We need to find $75,000.
JUDGE TINLEY: You're exactly right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the Auditor I don't believe
is in here right now. My thought would be that we, you know,
commit to funding it, and then direct the Auditor to find the
funds somewhere in our budget. This is an unbudgeted item.
The one item that I think we can probably tag for this would
be the -- the large $106,000-plus little bit of sales tax
revenue that we received due to the sale of an aircraft that
was kind of an unexpected item. And that, to me, would be an
appropriate use of that funds. I was hoping to get the money
from E.I.C., but that didn't happen. The next best bet would
be sales tax revenue generated directly from the airport;
seems like a likely source. The question I do have, I guess
to Rex, do we have to declare an emergency to use that --
that sales tax money? That's not a budgeted item. We don't
have -- I don't know that we're going to have $75,000 extra
in our budget anywhere this year; we're pretty tight. I
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
13
mean, how do we access that fund, or do you know? Or is that
more an auditor question?
MR. EMERSON: I think that's more of an auditor
question, but if you go outside your budget, yes, you do have
to declare an emergency.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess it probably would
qualify. It was an unexpected expenditure that was moved
forward by --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Didn't we take an action to
accept that by expanding our budget by the appropriate amount
and accept it into the general fund? Did we not do that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm not --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I believe we did.
MS. MABRY: We did do an amendment for the 106,000
as well as the 75 overage that were we were anticipating. We
I have done the amendments for those.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, that's already been --
taken place.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So it's in the general
fund, available for use.
MS. MABRY: Yes, it is. It's available.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought that was the
24
25
6-8-09
MS. MABRY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Don't you still have to -- if
case.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
14
it's in the... I'll make a motion that we authorize
expenditure of 75,000 for the Phase 2 match -- County's
portion of that match, Phase 2 project at the airport.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: With those funds to come from
the increased revenue that we received from the sales tax of
approximately 106,000. And if we need to do something
further budget-wise, we can do it at our next meeting.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question, Judge.
And I may be -- y'all may think I'm out of line here a little
bit. But talking about the right place for where the money
comes from, E.I.C. is the place -- the right place for that
money to come from. I'm kind of curious; I can't remember
why -- why we're not getting E.I.C. money to use there. And
why we're not talking about it is because some of the City
people are here in the audience today, and we can't talk
about things like that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, I'll be glad to. We --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you explain that to
I me?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Certainly. We put on it our
agenda to request the Airport Board to request that funding
6-8-09
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to come from E.I.C. The Airport Board did that. City
Council also has to sign off on a request from the airport.
They declined to do so, which meant that the request -- the
Airport Board cannot unilaterally take a request to E.I.C.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, they feel like that it
I was a --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You'll have to ask City Council
why they did it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's obviously not
economic development and -- okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That part, I can't answer.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It never really moved to
the E.I.C. It never moved past City Council.
JUDGE TINLEY: Council failed -- Council declined
to give the Airport Board permission to make an application
to E.I.C. for those funds.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Thank you for the
explanation. Boggles the mind, but thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
16
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, before we move on on
this topic, just a little bit of an answer to Commissioner
Baldwin. I told City Council, 'cause I was at the meeting,
and it'll probably be on our next agenda, that we're moving
into our budget and we need to find out from City Council if
the E.I.C., in their mind, is an option for funding out there
long-term. Because it is a -- it's going to greatly, in my
mind -- or my vote, it's going to greatly curtail
expenditures at the airport, capital improvement-wise, if the
City is not willing to fund some of those through E.I.C. You
I know, and they're aware that I -- of that statement, and also
aware that I'm going to ask them for a meeting -- joint
meeting so we can iron this out. Because the airport has a
lot of projects on the table that I think E.I.C. is an
appropriate source of those funds. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm glad to hear you say
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And if the City's going to
block that, we need to know, and the Airport Board needs to
know that.
I~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's an important point.
The Airport Board needs to know it, because the request needs
to originate there, and needs to be signed off on by both the
City and the County and needs to move forward. And you're
6-8-09
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It will be on our next agenda.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. I think -- Commissioner, I
think you put that squarely before the Council, because for
planning purposes on capital projects, so many of those in
the past have been funded with E.I.C. funds, and suddenly, if
'~ that, in fact, is going to be a reversal of -- of that
' policy, we need to know that, because we've got to do
planning, and they need to do the same.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on that item? Let's
move to Item 4; consider, discuss, take appropriate action on
plans enlarging Kerr County War Memorial. I put this on the
agenda. I mentioned it previously subsequent to our meeting
there with -- our ceremony out here on Memorial Day, and I
have asked the citizens and veterans groups to provide us
with input. I didn't know if the Commissioners Court has any
particular direction or -- or suggestions they wanted to make
to me with regard to that. One of the thoughts I've had is
possibly consulting with someone -- Mr. Lewis, for example --
on maybe some general design concepts to see -- see what he
thinks about it. I don't see it as anything extensive. And
coming up with possibilities before the veterans groups and
citizens that are interested in this matter.
6-8-09
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, I think -- I like that
approach. I think we need to have a plan. I just don't want
to go out there and start doing something. I think we need
to have an idea of the number of names and how we're going to
structure it, and that whole little area will probably need
to be changed from a landscaping standpoint, which, you know,
probably in my mind is a good thing, because some of the
shrubs that are out there are kind of overgrown a little bit.
JUDGE TINLEY: We're taking some of them out, as
you know, to try and open that area up a little bit. But as
-- as we enlarge that memorial, it's going to have to -- have
to be some changes to make those larger.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It just needs to run
consistent, be compatible with what's there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Don't want to just pour a
slab and set some kind of a monument up there. Needs to look
like it belongs there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And think it's only fair
that we have a discussion at some point about how it's going
~ to be financed. Are we going to use taxpayers' money? Are
we going to go to the community for donations?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Veterans group.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Does the airport want to pay
6-8-09
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I memorial.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, it's a worthy thing
to do, but we need everybody to buy into the plan. Veterans
groups and all of those folks who have a vested interest in
expansion of that need to sign off on it at the beginning.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'm all in favor of using
Mr. Lewis, but at the same time, at some point Mr. Lewis may
get tired of these projects.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or send us a bill.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or may send us a bill someday.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, how many -- about how
many, do you think, names are we behind on? I didn't realize
there were any. But --
JUDGE TINLEY: Half -- maybe half a dozen.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Really?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are they from -- which war?
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, we may have some that are --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: One's from Desert Storm.
JUDGE TINLEY: We may be missing one, maybe two,
from Vietnam. And then we've got the conflicts since then.
6-8-09
20
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We got the first mid-east war, and now we've got Iraqi
Freedom. So, I -- as part of my call asking for input from
veterans groups and veterans and their families and so forth,
I've asked for that information also. I'm working with the
folks over at the History Center. They've given me some
names, and we need to review those to see where we are there.
But we definitely have some additions to be made. And if
it's just one, we need to get it done.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree.
JUDGE TINLEY: Because --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My recollection is that we had
a discussion a year or so ago about determining
qualifications to have a name put on the list, and I -- and
if my memory is correct, it was that there's a military form
that's filled out when you join the service, and that was the
criteria we were going to use, if you had signed that form
listing Kerr County --
JUDGE TINLEY: Home of record.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- as home of record at the
time you sign up.
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Or change, I guess, your home
of record with the military.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mm-hmm.
6-8-09
21
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the criteria.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And some will be able to
provide that and some won't, I guess. The older ones
probably won't.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, it's going to be a matter
of -- of going through and ascertaining with each individual
that they, in fact, qualify. There were some suggestions
made that they need to be homegrown, home -- you know, born,
raised, so forth. We thought that was being too restrictive,
and we finally came up with using the -- the military
designation of if the service member had, in fact, designated
Kerr County -- anywhere in Kerr County as his home of record.
That -- that was the eligibility criteria.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I agree with that a
hundred percent.
JUDGE TINLEY: Well, I'll go forward, then, with --
based on this discussion, and it -- it's going to take some
time, but we got a start. Let's go to Item 5; to consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action on resolution concerning
L.C.R.A. proposed transmission line. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. I think I mentioned at
one point previously that I was planning on bringing a
resolution to the Court related to L.C.R.A.'s two new power
lines that are coming through, or may come through Kerr
6-8-09
22
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
County, and I think everyone has a draft of it. And
Commissioner Williams made a few changes, minor grammatic
changes. I appreciate him always going over things like
this, polishing them up a little bit. It's, I think, fairly
controversial. I'll go ahead and read the body of it so
everyone in the audience knows what it says.
Whereas, the Lower Colorado River Authority is
proposing to construct the Twin Buttes-McCamey D-Westwind-
Kendall 345 kilowatt transmission line, and the
Westwind/Kendall-Gillespie-Newton 345 kilowatt -- kilovolt
transmission line, and both these transmission lines may
impact property in Kerr County; and
Whereas, Kerr County Commissioners Court
acknowledges the need for the transmission of electric power
and L.C.R.A.'s long-term support and commitment to the people
of Kerr County; and
Whereas, Kerr County is one of the most beautiful
and valuable assets, it's also valuable -- is one of our most
beautiful and valuable assets; it's also a valuable asset to
the entire state of Texas;
Whereas, we acknowledge that construction cost is a
factor in determining the selected routes; however, it should
not necessarily be one of the primary factors. There are
long-term impacts to the community and the region based on
the selected route; and
6-8-09
23
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Whereas, the Public Utility Commission of Texas
approves the final route, and Kerr County Commissioners Court
has no authority over this decision other than providing
comment by resolution;
Now, therefore, be it resolved that on this 8th day
of June, 2009, Kerr County Commissioners Court unanimously
requests that L.C.R.A. study all possible feasible routes for
the location of the proposed transmission line and includes
the following criteria as primary factors in selecting and
constructing this and any transmission lines in Kerr County:
1. Single-pole structures should be used and not
lattice structure poles.
2. To the extent possible, existing right-of-ways
should be used, or property adjacent to existing
right-of-ways, including Interstate Highway 10.
3. The location of transmission lines should
consider the impact on property values, aesthetics of the
beautiful hill country vistas, and protect hill country
natural resources.
That's it. I'll make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion to approve the
adoption of the resolution. Is there any question or
comment? Ms. Hoffman, did you have anything you wish to add
or bring to our attention today on behalf of L.C.R.A.?
6-8-09
24
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MS. HOFFMAN: Just a point of clarification,
L.C.R.A. Transmission Services Corporation. And also, I can
leave with Jody -- the P.U.C. has assigned a receptacle
number to receive any comments from commissioners courts or
other community groups regarding these projects, so I can
give that to her.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you happen to have that with you
now?
MS. HOFFMAN: I do. Would you like it?
JUDGE TINLEY: Yes. If you'd come forward, please,
let's get that in the record, because a number of our
citizens, when this transcript is posted online, will be able
to pick it up from that transcript.
MS. HOFFMAN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We'll also amend the
resolution to include that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Proper corporate name and
that number, whatever that number is.
MS. HOFFMAN: Project Number 37049 has been
established by the P.U.C. for comments concerning the Lower
Colorado River Authority Transmission Service Corporation's
proposed CREZ priority transmission lines.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the appropriate name?
25 ~ The corporate name?
6-8-09
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HOFFMAN: L.C.R.A. Transmission Services
Corporation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. That is the entity
of L.C.R.A. that's handling the project.
MS. HOFFMAN: Separate body, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Ms. Hoffman, do you know when
the approved routes will be coming out yet? I mean, the --
MS. HOFFMAN: When -- when we file our CCN?
October 7th on one line, and October 28th, I believe, on the
other.
COMMISSIONER	LETZ:	Okay.	And just one other
question while we're on	this	topic.	The question I'm
receiving the most is,	what'	s L.C.R.	A. going to pay?
MS. HOFFMAN: We --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I think it's going to have
a huge impact as to what people want. I don't know how much
of that can be made, you know, public at this point, 'cause
everyone certainly talks a lot about the Ford Power and Light
payments, and if this is going to be a comparable offer or
what. And the sooner L.C.R.A. can announce that, or whatever
they're going to do, the less my phone's going to ring, and I
would appreciate it.
MS. HOFFMAN: It's a question we've heard an awful
lot about. We don't have a definitive answer on that.
6-8-09
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
There's a public process that includes appraised values.
What you might want to do, Commissioner Letz, is I can leave
'~~ you with our real estate phone number, and if folks have
specific questions, they can contact our real estate folks
and ask how the process takes place. It's all very regulated
for us, since we're a public utility, so it's a very
different process than what folks have experienced with the
private company.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Or you could give them a
very, very low number and see if you couldn't shift some of
this over to -- to L.C.R.A.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If you have that phone number,
I'd be interested. Thank you.
MS. HOFFMAN: Sure.
JUDGE TINLEY: I would note with some interest that
a -- a major out-of-town law firm that has an office here in
Kerr County has run an advertisement soliciting condemnation
clients as a result of these power line issues. Ms. Hoffman,
let me renew my request to you, if I might, publicly. It's
my understanding that -- that the various alternative routes
that will be submitted in October to the Public Utility
Commission will, in fact, be identified sometime this month,
if not already, or significantly in advance of October when
they're laid before the Public Utility Commission. And I am
told, and I've had confirmed by people in your organization,
6-8-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
Commission. And what I would ask L.C.R.A. to do, or
Transmission Services Corporation or whomever might be doing
this, as soon as those routes are identified and known, that
they put them out for public notice so that the public is
aware of the various alternatives, rather than these various
so-called links that are out there. Because, as you might
know, people are justifiably concerned, and they're all over
the map on this thing. Once those alternatives are
recognized, it may be possible that one of those could
achieve some sort of political consensus that would be
beneficial to your people in the selection of this route, and
in the entire process. So, the earlier you can put those --
your organization can put those routes out to the public, it
would be greatly appreciated, and I would ask that they do
that as soon as they're aware of those various alternative
routes.
MS. HOFFMAN: Judge, I think I -- I shared with
you, I think, that I have --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Speak louder, please.
MS. HOFFMAN: I have shared that request that you
stated the last time, and I've been told we will not be
making those routes public until we file them with the Public
Utility Commission. But I -- I hear what you're requesting,
6-8-09
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and I will certainly note it.
JUDGE TINLEY: As you indicated, you did pass that
along to the folks that have the apparent authority to make
those decisions, and to this point, they've declined. My
request to you today is that you renew that request from this
Court.
MS. HOFFMAN: I will do so.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Any other questions or
comments on this matter? All in favor of the motion, signify
by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Thank you,
Ms. Hoffman.
MS. HOFFMAN: Mm-hmm.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item -- I'm sorry, did
you have something?
'i COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I just wanted to tell Jody,
at the break I'll get with you; we'll make all these
corrections. That's all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 6, if we might.
Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to review and
accept the concept plan for the Uvalde Gin Tract off Goat
Creek Cutoff Road and located in Precinct 4. Mr. Odom?
6-8-09
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Thank you. Phoenix Summit,
Limited, is proposing a 72-lot development off Goat Creek
Road -- Cutoff Road, I'm sorry. Mr. McCormick, the engineer
from Matkin Hoover, and Mr. Strake are here to answer any
questions and present the concept plan. The majority of this
tract is in the city of Kerrville's ETJ. It also has a very
small portion of Zone A, 100-year floodplain, on it. At this
time, Mr. McCormick and Mr. Strake would like to present to
the'Court the concept plan for this future development. I'll
turn the time over to Matkin Hoover.
MR. McCORMICK: Good morning. I'm Matt McCormick
with Matkin Hoover. I'm here to answer any questions you
guys might have on this one. We -- just to give you a little
background, being half in the ETJ and then half in the
county, we tried to basically walk the line on the most
stringent of the two for this -- this subdivision as far as
laying out the number of lots and the configuration and
whatnot. Currently -- just a little background -- it is
planned to have a public water system. Aqua Texas has a
private system adjacent to Lot 4 that currently serves
Greenwood Forest. We've made contact with them and extended
that service into this development. It is also planned that
this -- these lots would utilize on-site sewage facilities.
So, any questions?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Your -- I don't have our
6-8-09
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
subdivision rules. Can you get down to a 1.8 average with a
public water system?
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah, 1 acre minimum. And then you
take the total acreage of the development divided by two if
you have public water.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MR. McCORMICK: Is what I understood.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I thought we had, like, a 2
and a half average, wasn't it?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, it's a 2-acre average.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That was only --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: About 140 -- I mean, 143.8
divided by --
MR. McCORMICK: It's, like, 71 point -- it's, like,
71.9 or something.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, you're really going to have
71 lots.
MR. McCORMICK: Well, we propose -- one's a 20-acre
lot. That Lot 32 is a 20-acre lot. So, there would be -- I
mean, we have it currently proposing 72 lots. We took the --
the acreage and rounded it. I mean, we just took the -- if
we were at 71.4, we would have gone down to 71. That was
just the reasoning behind that. So --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is any of this in the ETJ of
Ingram, or is it all Kerrville?
6-8-09
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
31
MR. McCORMICK: I do not understand it to be in
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Is there -- how close are you
to public water from the city of Kerrville? Do you know?
MR. McCORMICK: Quite far away. We're on the -- I
mean, as you see the line going through us, I mean, we're
right on the edge of the ETJ. So, I mean, it's -- it's
beyond the 2,000 feet that would be required to extend it.
'~ COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the roads are public?
Private?
MR. McCORMICK: The owner has not indicated that to
me quite yet as far as what they would be. I would assume at
this point they'd be public, but --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Aqua Texas -- and I'm asking
this question for the benefit of one of the members of our
audience, Councilman Motheral. The -- Aqua Texas generally
does not have sufficient capacity for fire flow.
MR. McCORMICK: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What are the plans for fire
flow in the subdivision?
MR. McCORMICK: I don't know if the discussions
that we've been in, the talks with the City -- the City, I
think, would like to have -- I mean, being in the ETJ, they'd
like to have fire protection, so that would be -- between
6-8-09
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
upgrading their system, their -- where we have ground
storage -- enough ground storage, water to provide fire flow
and upgrade their pumping system to provide the fire flow
that's required by the City.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Did you say Aqua Texas
MR. McCORMICK: It's the -- if you can see on your
little plan, there's a couple little circles on that area
topo. Those are the current -- it's just adjacent to Lot 4,
just to the -- just to the southeast of Lot 4.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And from that location they
also serve Greenwood Forest; is that correct?
MR. McCORMICK: I believe so, yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And is that the only
location they have that serves the entirety of Greenwood
Forest, to your knowledge?
MR. McCORMICK: To my knowledge, yes. I mean, it
serves this hilltop right here. I think it's a booster to
get it up on top of that hilltop.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That was my next question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the concept's, you
know, fine. I mean, I -- you know, there's a couple -- some
issues. I think, as we told the last concept plan that came
in, I -- I don't know if you've met with the City of
Kerrville staff; I think you need to meet with them as well.
6-8-09
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
We have an agenda item somewhere today that's going to
address these issues a little bit with the subdivisions
planned, though within the ETJ at the present time, and I
believe it's on City Council's agenda, a similar item for
tomorrow night. The one question that I have that I think
we're going to have to confer closely with the City of
Kerrville on, my initial feeling would be that the -- and
this is what -- I've told City of Kerrville this already,
that a development like this is -- there's going to be a --
hopefully, a lead entity, whether it be the City or County
that handles these. Because of the density and the type of
this development, probably the City fits it better than the
County, because of the -- but, you know, the issue that comes
up, though, is I don't believe the City has jurisdiction
outside the ETJ at all, even though part of the subdivision
does. So, the -- that may not be possible here. I think
it's something we're going to have to look at, but I think
it's -- you are correct in the assumption that it's going to
III be hopefully a combination of our rules and the City rules,
regardless.
', MR. McCORMICK: Okay. Ordinarily, I think what
we're looking for is just a clear, direct dialogue of what
regulations we need to apply where. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's a lot of people
25 ~ looking for that.
6-8-09
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah. It's going to be -- just,
this one is definitely -- being around the edge, is going to
be unique in that regard. We're willing to work with either
one. I think it's -- we just need to know what rules to
follow, and we're happy to do so.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you say you prefer
this --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Ray? Go ahead. Ray, have
you reviewed this from an environmental --
MR. GARCIA: We are in the process of doing that
now. We have the concept.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. So you haven't
completed that yet?
MR. GARCIA: No.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's the only thing.
You're going to -- I don't see how -- you know, we already
have one problem area out there with lots very substandard.
They for sure don't meet our requirements, and they're having
a problem getting wastewater in right now. I don't believe
that these -- this size tract will have as big a problem,
because they're bigger, but there are some contours where
there are pretty steep slopes and things are going to have to
be dealt with, but I'm sure they can probably work it out
somehow, more than likely aerobic systems, unfortunately.
But that's my only real concern. It's not the density. As
6-8-09
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
35
long as you can -- you can meet the requirements for O.S.S.F.
and you have water, and the streets and everything meet the
standard, I don't have a problem with it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're talking -- what are we
talking about, 14, 15 lots in the county?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: More than that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, the --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Looks like --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Probably a third.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- about a third of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: A third of it's in the county
only, and the other part's in the ETJ.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I mean, in the county only,
I a third?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: About a third of them. I'm
~ just --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, clearly, Environmental
Health, that's going to be the County. Floodplain's going to
be the County. Those are two that -- I mean, over the whole
area.
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hopefully we'll have a little
bit better answer, I mean, after tomorrow night as to at
least a direction on the -- what exact rules you have to
6-8-09
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
36
follow, and to keep you from having to go through both
MR. McCORMICK: Tomorrow night is --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: With --
MR. McCORMICK: Is there something on the City's
agenda tomorrow night?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, there's -- I sent a
letter to the City Manager, and that letter is on -- or a
discussion of that letter is on our agenda, and it's on their
agenda as well. And it kind of lays out a little bit of a
framework as to how we should work until we get the new rules
completely done. And I haven't had a -- Kevin Coleman's in
the audience. I haven't had a chance -- we've played phone
tag. Kevin, do you have anything you want to add?
MR. COLEMAN: No. You're right, it is on the
Council's agenda, framed around kind of a case-by-case
resolution of these, and this is one of those.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's going to be -- it's
obviously going to be a little bit difficult. I think it's
incumbent upon the City and the County to, early on, set
which rules are going to be used, and once that's determined,
no change is made. And we'll determine which -- I think,
hopefully, we can come to an agreement that you're only going
to work with one entity, and then we'll have to work
internally between ourselves to make sure some of these
6-8-09
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
37
things work out. That's the goal, based on a meeting I had
with the City Manager on that, subject to, you know, our
approval and Council's approval. But the concept looks good.
I mean, I see some challenges from the Environmental Health
septic standpoint.
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Some of that's just --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, you know, that's -- if it
meets the rules, it meets the rules.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think the other big issue is
going to be fire flow.
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Because this is an area of high
growth that I think both the -- everyone acknowledges in
certain areas we're going to get more and more growth. There
will be more and more subdivisions and services offered out
in these areas, and at least the capacity to put in a fire
system down the road, even if it's not fully available right
now, is going to be a requirement. But, looks good.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. If it gets built out,
it's a wonderful thing. We don't want to hinder progress.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where is this off Goat Creek,
Bruce?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's right --
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
38
MR. ODOM: Steve Schwarz'.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right adjacent to kind of --
what is it that --
MR. ODOM: Greenwood.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Greenwood's up on top of the
hill, accesses to the big boulder entrance right next to
that.
MR. ODOM: Right next to that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Kind of right behind Doc
Schwarz' old place.
MR. ODOM: Behind Doc Schwarz' old place.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just past the Windmill
~ Ridge.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Past Windmill Ridge and past
Greenwood Drive.
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nice, nice area.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, it is a nice area.
MR. ODOM: May I -- I've run a traffic count. They
have that coming out on the back side, and I'm running around
4,000 cars right out of the -- now, that was over a five-day
period. About 32 cars, 33 cars an hour is running that on a
24-hour basis, so you might really consider part of that --
part of that release. The requirement to the city is two
releases, and they're releasing on Skyview. So, there was --
6-8-09
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I'm sure if I'm getting complaints now, you will get some
more. Plus, if this is county-maintained, I assure you,
there will be complaints through that subdivision, 'cause
that will be a shortcut back over to Goat Creek Cutoff. So
you might --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, it would be, except for
the configuration of the roads.
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Be kind of an unhappy thing
to curve through the neighborhood there to get over to Goat
Creek Cutoff. I can understand people on Skyview having --
it's already a high-speed racetrack.
MR. ODOM: A racetrack through there, and a lot of
that is coming out of that mobile home park back behind.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: I just sort of envision in the future
that that'll be a cut-through. If that's not a private
subdivision, it'll be public road, so anybody can go through
it.
MR. McCORMICK: I think you pointed out, the
configuration of the roads is, you know, intended for traffic
calming purposes, so that we're not keeping straight.
There's a major curve there that's going right through this
thing so that it creates cutoff; come up the hill and have to
stop, turn right again, turn right. I mean, it's going to
6-8-09
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
MR. ODOM: Hopefully you're right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else with regard to this
particular item, gentlemen?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just one more quick one. Len,
are these going to be local roads, or is there -- is that
main road going to --
MR. ODOM: One of the roads is going to be --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- collector?
MR. ODOM: Well, it's 72. I need to be at 80, I
12 believe.
13
14
15 have on
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 80?
part of that road there being a collector at that point. But
this one here is 60 -- from 8 to 61, and 61 -- oh, that's
right, 61 to 120 is collector.
MR. McCORMICK: What we would do is analyze,
basically like a watershed, for which way water on a ridge
line. We would probably delineate the water -- the
development there and come up with a probable distribution.
I mean, a person who's going to buy Lot Number 31, per se, is
not necessarily going to drive through the whole subdivision
to go to Goat Creek Cutoff; he may go out to Skyview.
6-8-09
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Somebody who's buying Lot 69 or Lot 1 here is not going to go
-- so, we'll basically --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You're going to split it.
MR. McCORMICK: Going to basically split it up.
We'll divide a dividing line that's most probable, in almost
like a watershed fashion, and determine which way the
traffic's going to go. That'll determine at that point how
many lots are being concentrated on a certain street. And if
it's -- if it's over the threshold of 69 lots or whatever --
I mean, whatever the lot threshold is to go from a collector
to local, then, I mean, that'll be applied in that -- that's
the manner that I would approach it at.
MR. ODOM: Keep in mind, you're going to have two
things down there; you have an elementary school and you have
the post office. Skyview is the release.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mm-hmm, yes.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other -- just another --
just looking at it, I see some concerns on the drainage. I
mean, it looks like some of these, the -- not sure how it's
all going to pan out for something that's going to be a
concern, but this density, and then the amount of --
MR. ODOM: Runoff.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- developed property right
adjacent to the subdivision, right next to it.
MR. ODOM: Greenwood Forest is right next to that
6-8-09
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
drainage ditch that's going to be going into it on that back
side. That is something that certainly has to be looked at
to make sure we're not infringing on --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lots 33, 34, 38, that's --
they're pretty small lots with the drainage going through
them.
MR. McCORMICK: Down below that is where -- I mean,
down below that is where, as far as off-site --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You do it on 32?
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah, 32 is where we have
potentially -- you know, potential detention area, adding it
there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: 54 -- 54, likewise. Possibly.
I don't know; those are bigger lots over on that side.
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah. I mean, they're 1 -- they
average 1 -- average 1-acre lot -- 1.8-acre lots. I mean, I
don't think there's going to be massive homes, by any means.
I think they're going to be pretty modest. But the -- we're
definitely -- we do lot fits on most all our plans, so that
we can make sure that most footprints -- a standard footprint
of a 3,000 to 4,000-foot home will fit on it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That was going to be my
question; how big are the homes going to be you're
25 ~ projecting?
6-8-09
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. McCORMICK: It may not be that, but that's a
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Some of them are just --
MR. ODOM: 2,600, probably.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- intermediate, kind of
intermediate size homes. What's intermediate nowadays?
3,000 or 4,000 feet?
MR. ODOM: It's at least 2,600 square feet.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
MR. ODOM: 2,500, 2,600 is probably minimum, make
it work.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Looks -- I mean, looks good.
It's an area of growth.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Area of growth, and it's
another one of those situations where we're going to start
overloading our infrastructure.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: With access and egress and
ingress.
MR. ODOM: That's right. Wren Road will probably
be developed in the future, so that whole area will --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: At some point in time, we
need to have a way out, over to Goat Creek.
MR. ODOM: That's right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Goat Creek Cutoff is county,
6-8-09
44
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Unfortunately, it's county.
III COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can't we give it to Mike
Coward? Maybe they'll do that upgrade.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: He doesn't want it.
MR. ODOM: I thought --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think it'd be cheaper
building a state highway than it would be to widen that.
MR. ODOM: I don't have much right-of-way there at
all. What you see is what you get.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Forty foot max, isn't it?
MR. ODOM: I think it's 40 when we redid that --
Mr. Voelkel did that, Voelkel Engineering.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: All we had were ditches on a
15 road.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. ODOM: That's it. You fall off into the ditch.
JUDGE TINLEY: Are we done here, gentlemen? Thank
you. We appreciate it. Let's go to Item 7, if we might.
Consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to accept
maintenance bond for Mo Ranch Road for one year, located in
Precinct 4. Mr. Odom?
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Mo Ranch was relocated to
make for a safer and better route through Mo Ranch
facilities. This road has met all the qualifications Kerr
County requires, and signage has been put into place. At
6-8-09
45
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
$79,037.40. This maintenance bond will be good from June the
8th, 2009, to June the 8th, 2010. In one year, we will
recheck the road and require any repairs to be completed
prior to the County accepting the road for maintenance. So,
', at this time, I ask the Court to accept it, to release that
performance bond and accept the maintenance bond.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: 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 does carry. Let's go to
Item 8; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to set
a public hearing for revision of plat for Headwaters, Phase
3, and located in Precinct 4.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Headwaters, Phase 3, had a
change to the curve on Northridge Drive. Tract 3 and Tract
11 will have revisions because of the change in the curve of
the road. There are currently two property owners in Phase 3
of Headwaters, and they are to be -- Cheryl and them tell me
6-8-09
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
that they will contact them, or if the Court directs us, we
will, but those two people need to be notified of the change
here. At this time, we ask the Court to set a public hearing
for July the 13th, 2009, at 10 a.m., for the revision of plat
of Headwaters Ranch, Phase 3, Volume 4, Pages 92 through 93.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for setting
a public hearing on the revision of plat for Headwaters,
Phase 3, for July 13, 2009, at 10 a.m. Question or
discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion,
signify by raising you your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Item 9;
consider, discuss, take appropriate action to remove cattle
guard on Wilson Creek Road located in Precincts 2 and 3.
MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. When we submitted this, we
did not have State Bill 1059. We received that Friday
afternoon, I believe it was, or Friday morning when I
received it to read that. But what we were going to ask the
Court, and we're open to your suggestion, State Bill 1059
says that it's going into effect September the 1st of this
year, and so then, therefore, what I have asked for, do we
6-8-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
47
wait till September the 1st, and do I re-notify those people
again? I've already sent certified out that we would do
that, and we finally -- my English degree at A & M finally
was approved by the Court, and its wording, and --
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: With a little tweaking from
an old Baylor boy.
MR. ODOM: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, lord.
MR. ODOM: I knew what I was wanting to say; it
just didn't come out that well. But, anyway, we have a new
policy, and so what would the Court like for me to do? Can I
go ahead and do this, or should I wait till 1st of September?
Which doesn't bother me. I can still take it out and
probably get it in this year's sealcoat program anyway. That
was part of the proposal, to seal it out.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom, you followed the Court's
policy and existing law, and have done everything necessary
up to the part where it comes to this Court for approval to
actually pull the trigger on removal of the cattle guards,
have you not?
MR. ODOM: I feel quite confident that I have.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. It occurs to me that it's
before the Court right now, and -- and in accordance with
existing law and policy, and since the new requirements don't
6-8-09
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
take effect until September 1, why, we're free to go ahead.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the way I read it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree.
MR. ODOM: I defer to an opinion from -- I see a
shaking head up and down; to me, that's yes. Okay?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I note with interest that
you included a little small part of Precinct 2 in there, and
that's way back there where Colvin has some property, and one
other property owner. There are no cattle guards back in
there that you're going to remove.
MR. ODOM: No.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's all in Commissioner
Letz' precinct.
MR. ODOM: I was -- that individual has a fence
line. Your precinct was on the fence line on the inside.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Odom.
MR. ODOM: Yes. So, I have an answer that I can go
ahead and take that out and program that to do a sealcoat,
right?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
MR. ODOM: Pardon me? I'm hard of hearing.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes.
MR. ODOM: Yes, okay. All right. That's answered
~ my question.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I -- I thought you sent
6-8-09
49
1

3
4
5
6
7
8
a
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
23
24
certified. I think it would -- just from the standpoint of
the difficulty we've had in that area, to send another letter
to these people; just give them a little bit of a timetable,
~, that it's coming this summer. Just say that we're getting
ready to take them out.
MR. ODOM: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: They certainly have plenty of
notice; they've been told several times. Mr. Bohnert was
told by me verbally recently. But maybe some of the other
people out there, say that, you know, this -- during our
summer program, these cattle guards are coming out.
MR. ODOM: All right. We'll send the ones that we
sent certified to; we'll renotify them. Do you want it
certified or registered?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Either way. Whatever you want
to do.
MR. ODOM: My budget, that's what I'm worried
about. Okay, sir, we'll notify them.
JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Emerson?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just so we're sure they were
I notified.
JUDGE TINLEY: Does the Court need to take any
25 ~ statutory requirements have been met.
6-8-09
50
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
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Under -- under our -- the rules
that we -- that you submitted a month or so ago, I know you
have to bring it to the Court. Do we have to approve it as a
court? I know we've already done it kind of once on this
one, but on your -- under your new rules, I can't remember
what your final --
MR. ODOM: I think that I had I would bring it -- I
said I would bring it to the Court for your authorization to
do that. And if any citizen had a complaint, then they
could -- it was their responsibility to come to the Court to
protest that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I remember.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The Judge is reading it real
JUDGE TINLEY: It says they're removed during
scheduled maintenance under those circumstances. Road and
Bridge will present to the Court a road that meets that
criteria and seek authorization to notify.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Done that already.
I
JUDGE TINLEY: After authorization -- after
Commissioners Court authorization to remove cattle guards,
Road and Bridge will provide six months notice of intent to
remove.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We did that already.
6-8-09
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: That's what I'm thinking.
MR. ODOM: January 15th was the deadline that we
sent out. It's almost a year ago that we did that.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So, it's time to take them
out. It's okay; we've done everything.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
~~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Far as I know, we have.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right.
MR. ODOM: Best of my knowledge, we've followed --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: One question. That policy
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Would that mean,
Mr. County Attorney, that the six-month clock starts running
from 4-13-09? Or from the previous time we took the
I discussion?
MR. EMERSON: Starts from the previous time of
discussion and the initial notification.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you.
MR. ODOM: All right, sir. Thank y'all.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. It is now 10 o'clock,
and we are to Item 10, which is a timed 10 o'clock item;
consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to approve the
audit of the basic financial statements and supplementary
6-8-09
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
information for the year ended September 30th, 2008.
Ms. Hargis?
MS. HARGIS: Good morning. I would like to
introduce Mr. Keith Neffendorf from our audit firm so that he
', can present the audit to you. Keith?
MR. NEFFENDORF: Good morning. How are y'all?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Hi.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Morning.
MR. NEFFENDORF: Anyway, we did the audit for the
County this past fiscal year. And in the past, under -- as
you. recall, starting in about 2004, we are now under GASB 34
requirements. Therefore, as you can see in the audit report,
you will have two sets of financial statements. One set will
be under the full accrual accounting with all your
depreciation on your fixed assets and your long-term debt,
and the other set will be what I like to call basically the
old governmental statements where they'll just show your
assets for each individual fund and give the income,
revenues, and expenses on that basis. What I'd like to do is
just go through and hit the high points. If you have any
questions, you can stop and ask me at any time. If not, if
you get some later, just give us a call.
The -- after the index, starting on Page 1, this is
the independent auditor's report, stating we have made an
audit of the financial statements for the county of Kerr as
6-8-09
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
paragraph there, we state, in our opinion, the financial
statements referred to above present fairly the financial
position of the county as of September 30th, 2008. This is
the standard auditor's clean opinion letter, top of the line,
best you can get. That's what every county finance
department and commissioners court strives for. The next
section, Management Discussion and Analysis, Pages 2 through
8, is a requirement of GASB 34. We're not required to give
an opinion on it. That's why it's labeled "unaudited." What
it is, is additional information in summary form of your
financial statements, and gives a narrative summary, and it's
real good information for your readers, but I'm not going to
', go over it. Like I say, most of the time we get comments
I that they -- most people just like to read this; they get a
good overview of your financial statements. But I'm going to
actually go over some of the numbers in the actual financial
statements that we give an opinion on.
Starting on Page 9, Statement of Net Assets, this
is the equivalent to a balance sheet for enterprise. And
like I said before, this is under GASB 34; this includes all
your capital assets that are related to depreciation, and
also your long-term debt. So you can see, including all your
capital assets, the total assets for the county as of
September 30th, 54,692,000. Your liabilities, including
6-8-09
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
long-term debt, were 6,987,000, so you had net assets
equivalent of retained earnings or stockholder equity for the
county of 47,704,000, of which you can see that bottom
number, under unrestricted net assets, 4,531,000 is just what
it says, unrestricted. And anybody who knows financial
statements would say this is a very good financial statement,
', a good position to be in. Any company would love to have
li 54 million in assets, almost 7 million in debt. Strong
equity position.
~ Page 10 is the statement of activities. This is
the equivalent of an income statement, and that's what GASB
34 calls it, though, statement of activities. It's a little
different format than the regular income statement, but gets
to the same bottom line as an income statement would. So,
you can see the first column, you start out with the expenses
for the county by those functions, and remember, these
include depreciation, so your total expenses for the county
were 22,351,000. You subtract off what they call program
revenues and the first column, charges for services. These
are all your fines and fees collected by the various offices.
And the operating grants and contributions, these are the
money received from the state. Comes up to a net expense of
-- for the county of 18,104,000. How that was financed is
shown there in the general revenues. You have your property
taxes for general purposes, and debt service, 12,700,000.
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
55
The other taxes, including sales taxes, almost 3 million, and
you have your grants and contributions, miscellaneous,
investment earnings, so the total general revenues,
17,927,000. So, for the year, you had a net change, a
deficit of 176,000. That would be the loss for the year.
JUDGE TINLEY: Excuse me.
MR. NEFFENDORF: Yes, sir?
JUDGE TINLEY: The -- included within those
expenses are non-cash type items, such as depreciation?
MR. NEFFENDORF: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: How much depreciation or non-cash
items did we have?
MR. NEFFENDORF: About 1.7 million.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. So that greatly exceeds the
so-called --
MR. NEFFENDORF: Loss.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- deficit of 176,000.
MR. NEFFENDORF: Oh, yeah, mm-hmm. And that's --
and I'll get to that after a while when we reconcile the
governmental to GASB; you'll see the different amounts that
come into play. But, yes, sir, that is a correct statement.
That $176,000 loss for the year includes about 1.7 in
depreciation.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Which, in effect, becomes a
I deduction of net assets.
6-8'-09
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. NEFFENDORF: Right, mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
MR. NEFFENDORF: Pages 11 and 12 is the balance
sheet for the governmental funds. This is the old -- what I
like to call the governmental basis. This doesn't include
fixed assets. And you can see, it's across the top there for
the general fund. The assets were 3,651,000. Liabilities of
accounts payable, deferred revenues of 1,077,000. So, a net
fund balance of 2.574 million, which is real good. Road and
Bridge had assets of 575,000, liabilities of 78,000. Also
had a fund balance of almost 500,000. And, of course, your
capital projects fund, this is the moneys -- the fund used to
account for the C.O.'s, the tax notes that were issued, and
the remaining balance just shows the cash of a little over a
million, and the remaining balance of a little over a million
in the fund balance. Non-major, these are all your little
special revenue funds, your debt service fund, that shows the
accumulated totals there. Then you have the total of all the
governmental funds for the county. Had assets of 6,720,000,
liabilities of 1,343,000, so a net fund balance of 5,377,509,
which is real good for a governmental fund section.
You take that fund balance of 5,377,000; top of the
next page there is how we reconcile from governmental to
GASB. You add back your net book value of all your assets,
minus long-term debt; that's that $41,397,000 figure. You
6-8-09
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
57
add back your current year capital outlay and long-term debt
principal payments, 794,000, subtract your depreciation
expense for the year of 1,738,000. You add back your other
adjustments going from the modified accrual to the accrual
basis and reclassifying the tax note proceeds as a liability,
so that's 1,874,000, so you come up with your GASB 34 net
assets of 47,704,000.
Pages 14 and 15 are the statement of revenues and
expenditures for the governmental funds, and this is on the
governmental basis, so it does not include the depreciation.
On the general fund, the revenues were 14,467,000.
Expenditures, 14,419,000, so it had $48,175 debt -- I mean,
excess. You add back your capital lease proceeds, 182,000,
so you had a net change positive for the year of the general
fund, 230,000. Road and Bridge had expense -- revenues of
2,458,000, expenditures of 2,517,000, so it had a deficit of
58,000 for the year. Capital projects, of course, like I
said, just earned some interest. You issued the tax notes of
1,780,000, and you spent capital outlay, 743,000, so it had a
net change positive of 1,025,000. Your other major --
non-major governmental funds, special revenue funds, debt
service funds were shown there, and had a deficit of 377,000
for the year. Put all the governmental funds together, your
revenues for the county were 21,830,000, expenditures of
22,943,000, so a deficit of 1,113,000. After you add back
6-8-09
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
your capital note proceeds, you had a positive change for the
year of 819,353.
Take that number to the top of the next page, and
this is again how we reconcile to GASB 34. Add back your
current year capital outlay, the long-term debt principal
payments, 794,000, subtract your depreciation of 1,738,000.
Give you some adjustments for modified accrual through
accrual basis, 51,000, so that's how you come up with the net
loss on the GASB 34 of 176,000. So, you can see on the
governmental basis, you had an $820,000 positive, and then it
was turned -- changed into a loss on the GASB 34 due to
depreciation. Page 17, that just shows the summary of all
the agency funds. These are the fee accounts held by the
various offices, and show the balance at the end of the year,
551,000.
Page 18 starts the notes to the financial
statement. These are additional disclosures required by
generally accepted accounting principles. The first part of
them I won't go over. The first few pages just cover the
basic presentation of what I've already gone over between the
GASB 34 and the governmental funds and statements. The notes
I'd'like to point out, first one is on Page 24, the deposits
and investments. The County's deposits at the bank were
fully insured or covered by FDIC insurance or pledged
collateral at the end of the year, and they were in
6-8-09
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
accordance with the Public Funds Investment Act. The second
part of that, halfway -- halfway down, shows the deposits and
temporary investments with the bank, and then also TexPool,
showing the 4,828,000 balance there. And even though TexPool
isn't covered by FDIC insurance or pledged securities, they
do have built-in safeguards, and it is in accordance with the
Public Funds Investment Act. Therefore, all the County's
funds were covered and in compliance with the Public Funds
Investment Act.
The other notes -- Note 3B just gives a summary of
the receivables breakdown. Note 3D gives a breakdown of the
capital assets, showing the additions and deletions and the
balances. And then it -- the next page shows the
depreciation expense by those functions. Note 3F is on your
long-term liabilities, and for last year, you can see you
issued tax notes of 1,780,000, capital leases of 182,000.
Your retired were 1,431,000, so you had a balance 5,682,000.
And the top of the next page also gives the detailed
information on each one of those certificates of obligation
notes payable, showing the balances at the end of the year.
And after that, we give a summary of the next five years,
what the requirements are, principal and interest. Likewise,
on Page 29, for the capital lease obligations through
Security State Bank, Caterpillar, and Ford Motor Credit,
shows the balances at the end of the year, and it gives a
6-8-09
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
summary then of the minimum lease payments showing what's the
amount due over the next five years.
Note 3G, retirement system. The County's a member
of the Texas County and District Retirement System. This
disclosure is provided to us by them. It gives a summary of
the description of the funding policy and shows the County's
pension costs for last year, $821,096. Page 31 just gives a
summary of the actuarial information, and once again, these
numbers are provided to us by the T.C.D.R.S., showing that --
you can see there at the bottom there, 2-31-07, the actuarial
value of assets of 19,612,000, liability of 21,996,000, so
the funded ratio was 89.16. So, you can see that your funded
ratio stayed about the same, which is real good. Because
it'll be interesting to see -- the 12-31-08 numbers will be
coming out here in the next month; we'll see what that -- you
know, the -- the Texas Municipal Retirement System, they
already had started seeing a hit on their 12-31-07 numbers,
so we shall see what the -- but, I mean, 89 percent is real
good funded ratio. That's one of the higher ones I've seen.
3H is just a summary of the County and City
operation of the municipal airport; that just gives the
separate financial statements for the airport operations.
3I on your risk management, y'all are covered under various
risks of loss through the -- insurance through the Texas
Association of Counties. They give the disclosure on them.
6-8-09
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Note 3J just on your operating leases, what the commitments
are. And then you have your other final adjustments on your
restricted net assets and the prior period adjustment to the
furniture, machinery, equipment.
Page 34, the supplemental statements, first one is
the budget to actual, the general fund; just shows compliance
with your budget. Your revenues, your final amended amount
budgeted, 14,318,000. You actually collected 14,467,000, so
you had a positive there of 148,000. Expenditures, your
final amended, 14,762,000; you actually spent 14,419,000, so
you had a positive there of 343,000. So, in total, after
your other financing sources, your net change, you planned a
deficit of 493,000; actually was a positive of 230,000, so it
a variance of 724,000 to the budget. Page 35, same statement
for the Road and Bridge comparison to the budget. Revenues
budgeted, final amount is 2,351,000. Actually collected
2,458,000. Positive variance of 106,000. Expenditures, you
budgeted 2,506,000, actually spent 2,517,000, so you're a
little over budget by $10,000. So, overall, you planned a
change deficit of 154,000; it was only 58,000, so you had a
positive variance for the budget. So, both statements show
positive variances with the budget.
The final two letters, the first one is internal
6-8-09
62
1
G
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we found no major weaknesses. Compliance, we also had a test
for compliance with laws, contracts, grant agreements, and as
stated there, we found no instances of noncompliance. The
final letter is our letter to you. We have to disclose
certain items to the Judge and Commissioners, as y'all are
considered the board of governance for this entity. And the
first item there, that's just our responsibility under
generally accepted auditing standards. Significant audit
findings, there were none. There were no difficulties
encountered in performing the audit. There were no corrected
or uncorrected misstatements. There were no disagreements
with management. The other items shown there, these are not
material weaknesses, but they are items we feel like could be
improved for the County's financial reporting. First one, of
course, internal audits. And Jeannie had issues and some
staff turnover, so we just recommend that when she gets --
and I think she's got that done now; she can start doing some
more internal audits.
And the second part, the County and District Clerk,
we found some of their smaller accounts where they are
holding money for the benefit of minors; we just recommend
that they keep a summary sheet of those to account for that,
keep track of it. And, finally, like I said, there was a
real -- it's a good financial audit. The County's in a good
financial position. And usually what most people want to
6-8-09
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
know is you got a clean opinion. You still have some cash in
the fund balance. Your cash and investments are secured and
in compliance with the Public Funds Investment Act, and your
budget-to-actual comparisons were favorable. So, those items
indicate that you've done a good job with your moneys, and we
appreciate the cooperation of Jeannie and her staff, all the
offices we visited, and you guys also, because you got to
make some tough decisions. And we were at a seminar last
week, two days in governmental accounting, and the big
overriding concern is the economy. So, luckily -- most of
the big cities have a big problem with sales tax. So far,
out here in the hill country area, we haven't -- we noticed a
little bit of drop, but not enough -- our biggest concern is
the property valuations. That would be a bigger drain on the
-- any of the governmental finances than the sales tax. But,
anyway, if y'all have any questions...
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only question is, you --
you have a glowing report. I mean, we're in good shape and
we take good care of the public's money. Are we in better
shape than Gillespie County? (Laughter.)
MR. NEFFENDORF: I defer that question. Anything
that might incriminate me.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Same answer as last year,
wasn't it?
MR. NEFFENDORF: No. Overall, you know, the -- the
6-8-09
64
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
counties up here in the hill country area are all in -- in
good financial -- you know, they've all done a good job with
their money, and like y'all, you know, they're all in about
the same -- same range with the fund balances, and are
holding the line to keep their moneys spent well, and use of
the taxpayers' money and the debt, you know, overall. You
look at a lot of these out here in the hill country; the
amount of debt that we carry is a lot -- substantially less
than in big municipal counties. So, good -- yeah, it's
comparable.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you.
MR. NEFFENDORF: That's all I'll give you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Hargis, do you or any of your
staff have any questions, or anyone else?
MS. HARGIS: No. We've been working with them, and
we're real pleased.
JUDGE TINLEY: Based on a straight cash operation,
looks like we're 820,000 to the good, and you plug in the
depreciation, and -- and our asset position declined because
of non-cash items to 176,000, right?
MR. NEFFENDORF: Right, mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, this is an action
item, is it not, for the Court to approve it?
6-8-09
65
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
JUDGE TINLEY: I think -- I think we are required
to approve it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would move that we
approve the audit of the basic financial statements and
supplementary information for the year ending September 30,
2008, as presented by the auditor -- outside auditor.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second 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. Thank you very
MR. NEFFENDORF: All right. Thank y'all. We
appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thanks, Keith.
JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to Item 11; consider,
discuss, and take appropriate action on agreement between
Kerrville Independent School District and the Kerr County
Juvenile Facility to provide educational services to the
juveniles housed at that facility. Mr. Stanton?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir. After a lot of discussion,
lots of phone calls this morning, and conversations with
6-8-09
66
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Mr. Emerson, we've come to the conclusion this is an
agreement that the juvenile -- between Kerrville ISD and the
Commissioners Court to allow Kerrville ISD to apply for
federal funds under the No Child Left Behind Act, and it's an
agreement that Mr. Emerson has reviewed, and he wants to do a
few minor clean-ups on the agreement. And what we're asking
is if you -- if the Commissioners Court would approve the
agreement pending the revisions that Mr. Emerson would like
to make.
JUDGE TINLEY: Subject to and to include the
modifications that he wishes to make to it?
MR. STANTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this the same -- this is
a different agreement we have in place, or basically the
same?
MR. STANTON: Basically, the same agreement.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval as indicated. Question or discussion? All in favor
of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion carries. Thank you very
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
67
much. Let's move to Item 12; consider, discuss, and take
appropriate action to adopt an order based on the burn ban
status prohibiting the sale or use of restricted fireworks,
those being skyrockets with sticks and missiles with fins, in
any portion of the unincorporated area of Kerr County.
Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It is what it is, Judge.
It's skyrockets with sticks and missiles with fins time. I
move that the Kerr County Commissioners Court place into
effect a ban to prohibit the sale of those particular types
of fireworks for the July 4th weekend.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And the reason that we do
this is because we're in drought conditions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: 'Cause of the burn ban
considerations.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm not real convinced that
we're in such a drought condition, myself. I mean, I'm going
to do a rain dance Friday -- no, I'll do it Thursday, right
after the dinner on the grounds. And --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not during.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Huh?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not during the dinner on the
grounds.
25 ~ COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, not during the dinner on
6-8-09
68
1
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the grounds, but right after.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: My question is, I think we're
in a drought right now, but say we start hitting some
significant rainy weather between now and the 4th of July.
Can we rescind this?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would think we could. If
we enact it, we can rescind it.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if that's the case,
I'll go along with it. But I -- I thought about this all
weekend. I was trying to figure out a way -- if we put this
thing in place, I mean, if we vote for it today, how in the
world would you change it later on? I mean, it's designed to
look down the road. I mean, you can actually come back and
change it, do you think?
MR. EMERSON: You can rescind it. But if you don't
put it in place, there's certain statutory time frames, and
if you miss that date, you can not enact it later.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's what I remember from
last year.
MR. EMERSON: So, if you don't act
time frames and it continues to be dry, it's
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understan~
JUDGE TINLEY: June 15th is the --
for us to put this into effect. It could be
that date, up to and including, I guess, 4th
on it before the
too late.
~ that part.
the cutoff date
rescinded after
of July.
6-8-09
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well -- well, that's
fantastic news; then I'm all for it. I'd hope that we'd keep
an open mind to the weather change, the rain cycles and all
that, as well as remember these folks that are in business
that sell these things. So, you know, if we -- when -- if we
can remember those things and consider them as we go along,
I'm certainly in favor of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Maybe they should do rain
I dances.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They probably do.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I think they do.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Maybe they can join the
~~ Commissioner with the rain dance.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think we have to do this,
because we don't know what's going to happen. It could shut
off right now; we don't get another drop of rain. If it
does, we're going to have a bunch of drought conditions, but
if it rains, I'm more than willing to rescind it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And the important thing,
this is the last opportunity we have to do it.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. It has to be done now
23
24
25
6-8-09
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do we have a second?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll move approval of it.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
or you can't do it.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
70
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and a second.
Question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the
motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go to
Item 13; consider, discuss, take appropriate action on
reviewing the status of interlocal agreement with City of
Kerrville concerning subdivision rules and regulations in the
ETJ. Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I put this on the agenda based
on two meetings last week, and I think that everybody
received a copy of the letter I sent to the City Manager,
Todd Parton. And it's a slight change in the direction that
we had been going in the past, which is why I put it on the
agenda. And also, we do have some pending subdivisions; I
just want to make sure the whole Court was aware of my
discussions, and everyone's in still kind of agreement.
Long-term, it appears that we're going to have a new set of
rules for the ETJ, as we talked about before, and then we're
also going to divide geographically the ETJ up into more
urban areas and more rural areas. And -- and that's the
conversation that Todd Parton and I had at our second meeting
last week, kind of directionally, and then it was kind of
6-8-09
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
left at that meeting that I would kind of work with Kevin
Coleman to come up with a draft set of rules that will then
be presented to the committee from both the Council and
Commissioners Court. And then after that committee approves
it, get it back to these full bodies, kind of a direction
where we're going.
In the interim, the discussions have been that
developers are required to comply with both our sets of rules
until we get a new agreement. But it does not make sense for
developers to have to work with both entities, and also
that's contrary to state law. So, the idea is that, case by
case, we'll decide who's going to be the lead entity, though
the rules will be a combination of -- whoever has the
stricter rules will be what will be required of the
developer. And that's kind of where that -- where we are on
that one. Both of these items have not gone to City Council
yet to get their direction and approval, and I don't think
the new City Manager has really -- you know, has a direction
from the Council on these, so it'll kind of be interesting
after tomorrow night.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This letter is the letter
that's on the agenda for tomorrow night?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, this is the letter. I
really didn't know it was going to be a specific agenda item.
I thought it was going to be under a carrying item, but I
6-8-09
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
72
guess the City Manager thought it was important enough to put
it on as a -- a particular agenda item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think they mentioned --
somebody mentioned to us when we met on the Colvin matter
that they have a standing agenda item that they can plug
these issues into.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is. They added an agenda
item, a specific agenda item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is an add-on?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: This is a consent item -- not a
consent item.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Discussion item.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Consideration item for them to
look at this letter and -- and discuss it.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And you want me to be
there, yeah. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And either -- you know --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, of course.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Someone needs to be there. And
I don't mind, but -- you know, it may be appropriate for me
to be there as well. I think I'm going to be there. But
that's just kind of where it is. I don't know that we really
need to take any more action other than kind of discussing
where we are. And I wanted to -- because it is on the City's
agenda, and we're kind of doing a few things a little bit
6-8-09
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
73
differently than we had talked about previously.
JUDGE TINLEY: That's the direction it's headed?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's the direction it's
headed at the moment.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MR. McCORMICK: One thing, quickly. The Uvalde Gin
tract, on the same topic, I was curious whether there is
going to be an action taken on the concept plan for that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We generally don't. We don't
do -- you got approval conceptually.
MR. McCORMICK: Okay. I was just curious.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We don't vote on these, because
MR. McCORMICK: Okay.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Until you get the actual
preliminary plat going.
MR. McCORMICK: Great, thank you.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think it will be real
important what City Council decides to do tomorrow.
MR. McCORMICK: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else on that particular
item? It's 10:30. Why don't we take us about a 10-,
15-minute recess.
(Recess taken from 10:30 a.m. to 10:47 a.m.)
6-8-09
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
74
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if
we might. We were in recess. Why don't we first go to
Section 4 of the agenda, payment of the bills.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move we pay the bills.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: I have a motion and second to pay
the bills. Question or discussion?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, oh, oh, stand by for
news. I think I had some questions. I'm not going to ask
that one, because it's always so stupid to ask why lawyers is
making so dang much money off the taxpayers. And lawyers
again here. It's just -- you know, when I look at, like --
like, 216th District Court, as an example, you look -- run
along there and some of them are $600 and $300, and $100, and
all of a sudden, $4,000? That's probably a -- they've been
running a tab up there or something. Here's one for 2,600.
You know, how -- how does that happen? What's that about?
Why is it so much more?
MS. HARGIS: I would be taking a real big guess in
saying that. Depends upon the type of case that it is. And
I know that Valdez one, I think, is a -- is a criminal type
of case. That's pretty large, been going on for a while,
because we've been doing some homework on it for some other
law firms. I don't know about the others, but we had to do
some open records for that one. I do know -- or have been
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
75
told that Judge Williams has actually pulled some of their
bills and reduced them, and has told some of them they won't
get paid for certain things. So --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What?
MS. HYDE: Wow.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Are you serious?
MS. HARGIS: I am very serious.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's telling them they're
not going to get paid for work they've done, huh? Wonder how
this is going to work.
MS. HARGIS: Yeah, we'll see.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's pretty interesting.
MS. HARGIS: Not my call.
JUDGE TINLEY: I've got a feeling it's going to
work real good, because those are the boys that sign off,
that brings it --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's about time.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- to her process.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 6, third from the top
there, Environmental Health. Now, I'm an old washtub player.
Wash Tub vehicle-gas. How does that -- how do those two
words fit together?
MS. HARGIS: Wash Tub is the name of the facility.
That's the name of the vendor. And --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A gas station? I think
6-8-'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
76
there's a washtub where you go do laundry.
MS. HARGIS: There's a Wash Tub -- the one on
Junction Highway is called the Wash Tub.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: On Thompson Drive, the
corner, that's a Wash Tub. The folks at San Antonio Wash Tub
bought that one.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm always the last to know.
On down further down the page, the historical -- did I say it
right? Historical?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Same page?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Historical Commission
reimbursement. Can you tell what that is about? I meant to
look at that before I came in here, and didn't get to it.
MS. HARGIS: My pages and your pages are not
coinciding, so --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's --
MS. HARGIS: Page 6?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, Page 6 on mine.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: County-Sponsored.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Under County-Sponsored.
MS. HARGIS: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: There's two historicals,
about a little over $500 reimbursement.
MS. HARGIS: Not without having the bill. I think
that they -- they're reimbursing, I think, for conference and
6-8-D9
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
travel here, if I recall.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And this wouldn't be
here if the money wasn't in the budget. I mean, you wouldn't
put this before me unless the money --
MS. HARGIS: No, and they also have some donated
money that they --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Where'd that darn County
Attorney thing go? Okay, Page 9. I think this is probably a
question for somebody up here. Lane Wells -- Wayne Wells,
consultant. His bill here is $511. Is that kind of on -- on
our schedule, or are we going to run out of money in that
line? Or does anybody know the status of that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Most of his get billed back to
the developer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, this is --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: He does very little that's not
billed back to a developer.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So this is just kind of a
pass-through type thing?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I would think so. But I --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So we pay him the $511, and
then we collect it from some developer or something?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
6-8-09
78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's how it's supposed to
I work.
MS. HARGIS: I'll check on that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Got to be an easier way.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's the way it's supposed
to work with floodplain administration.
JUDGE TINLEY: Except those are set fees. And --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: -- we just try to set an amount that
would recoup our costs.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think Wayne is on an hourly
rate, isn't he?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Hourly rate for this, I think
it's $75 a hour. I think.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Page 13, Tyler Technology
~ expense.
MS. HARGIS: This is their quarterly soft --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sorry?
MS. HARGIS: Quarterly software. The quarterly
software maintenance payments.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: It comes out of the technology fund.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. So, I see this four
times a year?
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
6-8-09
79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Ms. Hargis, do you have a
bill in here for anything? I haven't seen a bill with your
name on it. Guess you didn't have any bills this month.
Unless I'm completely blind, and I could be.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all I have.
MS. HARGIS: I can't answer that right now.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, these -- these attorney
bills, we're saying that some of them are -- are more
important than others. Like, on Page 1, Court-appointed
civil attorneys, Ms. Sandidge is 2,300. And the next big one
is $200. Okay.
MR. EMERSON: What typically happens on those,
Buster, is on your C.P.S. cases, that's usually where your
large civil bills come in. Those cases may go on a year,
year and a half, two years, and then they'll bill when
they're over.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So they just run a tab on
them? That's what I suspected. Thank you for that,
counselor.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments?
All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right
I hand .
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
6-8-09
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
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Do we have
any budget amendments?
MS. HARGIS: No budget amendments.
JUDGE TINLEY: I believe we have one late bill?
MS. HARGIS: Right.
JUDGE TINLEY: Is that correct?
MS. HARGIS: Yes. This is the -- Animal Control
requested -- called and requested to be able to purchase, I
believe -- I have not personally seen the bill, 'cause I
wasn't there when it came in on Friday, but -- and this
vendor we don't have an account with. So, I believe these
were fire -- guns of some sort.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is this?
~, COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Three guns. They are -- the
guns are wore out, and some of them are almost nonfunctional.
This is for three new guns, and what they are is, they are a
combination .22/410.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought that's what it
was, but the vendor's name kind of threw me.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah, I know. That does kind
of make things confusing, doesn't it? That's what it is;
it's for three new -- three new guns for Animal Control.
JUDGE TINLEY: And this is what they use for their
darts, right?
6-8-09
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: No, this is not what they use
for their darts.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: This is to take care of some
animals when they need to euthanize things on the side of the
highway, or if they get, you know, animals they need to do
something with at the shelter for rabies. They --
JUDGE TINLEY: Rapid dispatch.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Rapid dispatch. That's a
good term.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Called a put-down, right?
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's exactly what it is,
rapid dispatch put-down.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do I hear a motion to approve the
late bill?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion? All in favor, signify by
raising your right hand.
j (The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
82
be approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval of the monthly reports as presented. 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: Motion does carry. Oh, hold for a
minute; we have another report of cash position, results of
operation for eight months ended May 31, 2009, furnished by
the Auditor. Rather lengthy -- lengthy report. I guess,
technically, that could have been under the -- is this going
to be a monthly report, Ms. Hargis? Or is this going to be
quarterly or periodically?
MS. HARGIS: No, this is a monthly report that I'm
required, actually, to give to the District Judge, and so
we're going to start -- you're going to start seeing this on
a monthly basis.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay.
MS. HARGIS: And then I think you also have another
one on payroll, a payroll report that is also required by
6=8-09
1
,~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
83
presenting that on a monthly basis. We found in the statutes
where we're supposed to be providing you with the payroll for
you to approve every month, and so we're kind of doing it
after the fact, because we don't have it. So, you have for
the month of May in front of you.
MS. WILLIAMS: One short.
MS. HARGIS: We've been trying, she and I together,
to be sure that we're getting out all the reports that we're
supposed to get to you, and this is one we do need to present
to you on a monthly basis. And we've given you the format
that we think is the simplest for you to review, and this is
your -- your total payroll, which includes all of the other
departments which we also do their payroll for.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Ms. Hargis, you said you're
required by law --
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- to give this to the --
to --
MS. HARGIS: To you and the District Judge.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: A District Judge?
MS. HARGIS: 216th.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The District Judge. And the
25 I MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
6-8-09
84
1
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: A District Judge gets these
reports?
MS. HARGIS: Yes, sir. It says in Section 114, I
believe it's .025 or .026 -- I believe I quoted that in my
letter -- that on a monthly basis, I am to give the District
Judge and the Commissioners Court a report, and that report
shall have, you know, certain things in it, which -- which
this one complies with. And the prior District Judge said
that he didn't feel that he had a need for it, because it
wasn't his responsibility. But because it's in the statute,
the current new District Judge would prefer that I do this,
so I am complying with the statute.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand that. What
I about 198th?
MS. HARGIS: I don't do the 198th books, so I
wouldn't be required. Junction would be required to give
them that.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Junction does the 198th --
nevermind.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, the requirement is
predicated on the fact that the funds for 216th flow through
your office?
MS. HARGIS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Funds for 198th do not.
6-8-09
85
1
,~
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. HARGIS: Mm-hmm.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Got you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Easy enough to understand, isn't it,
Commissioner Baldwin?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Shoot, yeah. I like it that
way. Let's see. We have Junction, Brady --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Just out of curiosity, who
does submit that report?
MS. HARGIS: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If anybody does.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I'd be surprised if it's
submitted.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. I'm not going there.
JUDGE TINLEY: With respect to the payroll report
for the two pay periods ending in May, and the auditor's
report on cash position and results of operation for eight
months ending May 31, 2009, do I hear a motion that those
reports be approved as presented?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for
approval. Question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
6-8-09
86
1
2
3
4
5
n
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, can I ask a question
before we leave that item?
JUDGE TINLEY: Surely.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we are fully staffed, what
is our payroll? Is there a number that you come up with -- I
I mean --
MS. HARGIS: Because of overtime and fluctuation,
it's going to fluctuate on a monthly basis. And we also have
part-time people that will come in and go out. We have 264.5
positions currently funded in this budget.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I mean, this report would be
useful if I knew what a benchmark was that I was looking at.
But to me, this is just -- to see a payroll number, I don't
know -- I mean, we went down -- or increased by almost 9,000.
MS. WILLIAMS: The payroll from May the 18th was
for election workers for the City's election, that normally
we don't have. Normally, we would just have the 15th and the
end of the month. But sometimes somebody may not turn their
time sheet in on time, and H.R. is real good about wanting to
get these people paid. So, that's why we are a little bit
different. But normally, if you take the 15th and the end of
the month, that's roughly what we've been running. It's been
6-8-09
87
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Okay.
MS. HARGIS: We estimate the total is about
$12 million for the year.
MS. HYDE: Also, on the report, keep in mind that
the S.O., the J.D.C., most -- most of the offices that are on
law enforcement, the 171, do their overtime on the last
payroll of the month, not the first payroll of the month.
So, if you're looking for without O.T., for the most part,
your 15th will be closer to without O.T. or anything like
that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So, your second pay period is
always going to be higher than the first?
MS. HYDE: Yes, sir, it should be.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Okay. Do we have any reports
from any Commissioners in connection with their liaison
assignments?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir. Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir.
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I had a brief conversation with
Commissioner Oehler about the management discussion. I hope
everyone takes time and reads that carefully, since -- you
know, I won't say I wrote the whole thing this year, but I
6-8-09
88
:1
,~
3
4
5
o'
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
edited it, and the auditor -- not the Auditor; I guess the --
our auditing firm wrote the first draft, and I went through
and made some modifications to it. I just want to make sure
everyone's --
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Very enjoyable reading. I
(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah.
JUDGE TINLEY: We appreciate the opportunity to
take advantage of -- of your work, Commissioner. We
appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Everything else I already
discussed today in other areas.
JUDGE TINLEY: You know, with respect to that
management discussion and analysis, the consensus that I've
heard is that you've done such an excellent job on it this
year and in years past that we feel it's appropriate that you
continue doing that because of your ability and experience.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you, Judge.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Mainly experience.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Also, he has it in his
22
23
24 it.
25
JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, that's it. I think that's
JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler?
computer.
6-8-09
89
1
2
3
4
J
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not much. I talked to Janie
this morning about the -- that's the reason, you know, I stay
fairly informed with my liaison duties with the various
departments. Anyway, Janie called me this morning, and it
seems that those guns cannot be -- they can't just be titled
Kerr County. They have to have a name whenever they're --
when they, you know, fill out the yellow sheets and all that,
who they're registered to. So it's going to say, "Kerr
County/Janie Whitt." And so at some point in time, if Janie
ever leaves employment, we'll have to change that to whoever
the new person might be.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We can put them in your name.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't think so. I don't
guess Rusty wanted them either, so I guess it's whoever the
managing party is in that facility. But that's about it.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Do we have any reports from
elected officials? Department heads? Here's John.
MR. TROLINGER: Good morning. The Sheriff's not
here, so I might get a couple words in edgewise today. So,
it would be a good vacation for us also. (Laughter.) Our
I.T. specialist turned his resignation in this past Monday.
I know you'd all heard about it, but I wanted to inform you
directly. I've also gone to each -- most departments and
officials and informed them directly, in person. The plan
right now is -- is to post on the web site only the opening
6-8-09
90
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
for I.T. specialist, and if that turns out well, then we'll
go ahead and take those applications and work from those. If
not, we'll then post to the newspaper, so we'll save a little
bit of money there.
JUDGE TINLEY: Do you have a listserve that -- that
you work through, like so many of these other departments do
that is directed to I.T. type people?
MR. TROLINGER: There is. There's a statewide
county listserve that gets very good participation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And you'll be -- you're posting
it on that?
MR. TROLINGER: Well, I could. I hadn't considered
doing that. It would be -- I don't want to appear that I'm
stealing from other counties, --
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Why not?
MR. TROLINGER: -- their employees.
JUDGE TINLEY: Exactly my question, Commissioner.
Why not?
MR. TROLINGER: But, sure. Certainly, I --
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Just don't want to get stuck
with some other county's problem child.
MR. TROLINGER: Well, if someone wants to come to
Kerrville, it's very possible someone needs to move here.
Okay, I'll post it there. That's a great idea.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We've been faced with that
6-8-09
91
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
JUDGE TINLEY: Also been the stuckor as opposed to
stuckee, too.
MR. TROLINGER: The second item I've got, it didn't
make the agenda this time, but next time it should make the
agenda, is Hill Country Telephone has a proposal for us with
a -- a concentrator they'd like to put on our property. I've
sent y'all some pictures via e-mail, and that should be on
the next agenda. If there are any questions or if you want
to see the equipment in person, it would be a good time to do
it probably in the next couple of weeks. Looks like it's
going to be a pretty good deal for us.
JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you.
MR. TROLINGER: Thank you.
JUDGE TINLEY: Any other department heads?
MS. HYDE: Just a reminder that Wednesday -- sorry.
JUDGE TINLEY: You'll have to get real close so we
can hear you.
MS. HYDE: Just a reminder that Wednesday we're
going to all get together and work on the policy book up in
Jury Room 2. So, y'all are more than welcome. And we're
going to have sandwiches and chips if it extends into the
lunch hour, which hopefully --
JUDGE TINLEY: You're bribing with food now.
25 ~ MS. HYDE: Absolutely.
6-8-09
92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Wednesday?
MS. HYDE: Yes, sir, Wednesday morning at
9 o'clock.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What time?
MS. HYDE: 9:00 upstairs in Jury Room 2. There's
free coffee and, I think, water.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Water is free.
JUDGE TINLEY: Bottled water?
MS. HYDE: No, it ain't bottled water, Judge. You
have to get it out of that thing.
JUDGE TINLEY: Anybody else? Okay. We will go out
of public or open session at 11:10 to go into executive or
closed session and take up an item on the agenda.
(The open session was closed at 11:10 a.m., and an
executive session was held, the transcript of which
is contained in a separate document.)
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, we're back in open or public
session at 11:18. Does any member of the Court have anything
to offer with regard to anything considered in executive or
closed session?
MR. EMERSON: Go ahead. Then I'll --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: I was going to make a motion
that we authorize Ilse Bailey to represent the County in --
MS. BAILEY: Mediation.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- mediation on -- can I say
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2 t~
21
22
23
24
25
93
E.E.O. --
MS. BAILEY: E.E.O.C.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- an E.E.O.C. pending matter
I on June 29th.
JUDGE TINLEY: With her authority to be subject to
the later approval by Commissioners Court of any action that
she takes?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge, you're clairvoyant.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second.
COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second.
JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded as
indicated. Question or discussion on the motion? All in
favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign.
(No response.)
JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry.
MR. EMERSON: Just a quick comment. If this Court
were to receive a subpoena for the executive session
conversation, we would respectfully request immediate
notification so we can file a motion to quash based on it
being attorney/client privilege in litigation.
JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else? Anything else
at all to come before the meeting? We'll be adjourned.
(Commissioners Court was adjourned at 11:19 a.m.)
6-8-09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
94
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 10th day of June, 2009.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
B Y : ---- ~~ZC.~
Kathy anik, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
6-8-09
ORDER NO. 31323
7Tx ANNUAL GUADALUPE RIVER PARADE AT FLAT ROCK LAKE
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by a vote
of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the use of Flat Rock Lake on August 22, 2009 for the 7th Annual Guadalupe
River Parade.
ORDER NO. 31324
FUNDING FOR KERR COUNTY'S PORTION OF PHASWE II NMATCH FOR
AIRPORT PROJECT
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Authorize the expenditure of $75,000 for Kerr County's portion of the Phase II match of
the airport project, with those funds to come from the increased revenue that we received
from sales tax of approximately $106,000.
ORDER NO. 31325
RESOLUTION CONCERNING LCRA PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 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 Resolution concerning Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA Transmission
Services Corporation) proposed transmission line.
ORDER NO. 31326
MAINTENANCE BOND FOR MO RANCH ROAD
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 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 releasing the Performance Bond and accept Maintenance Bond in the amount of
$79,037.40 for Mo Ranch Road for one year from June 8, 2009 to June 8, 2010.
ORDER N0.31327
PUBLIC HEARING FOR REVISION OF PLAT FOR HEADWATERS PHASE 3
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 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 setting a Public Hearing for July 13, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. for the Revision of Plat
for Headwaters Ranch Phase 3, located in Precinct 4.
ORDER NO. 31328
AUDIT OF BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION FOR YEAR END SEPTEMBER 30, 2008
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a
vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve the Audit of the Basic Financial Statements and Supplementary Information for
the year ended September 30, 2008, as presented by the outside Auditor.
ORDER NO. 31329
AGREEMENT BETWEEN KERRVILLE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AND
THE KERB COUNTY JUVENILE FACILITY TO PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL
SERVICES
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 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 Agreement between Kerrville Independent School District (KISD) and the Kerr
County Juvenile Facility to provide educational services to the juveniles housed at that
facility, subject to the modifications to be made by the County Attorney.
ORDER NO. 31330
BAN ON RESTRICTED FIREWORKS
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of
4-0-0 to:
Approve prohibiting the sale or use of restricted fireworks (skyrockets with sticks and
missiles with fins) in any portion of the unincorporated area of Kerr County for the July
4th weekend.
ORDER NO.31331
CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS
Came to be .heard this the 8th day of June, 2009, came to be considered by the Court
various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are:
Accounts Expense
10-General	$	153,875.25
14-Fire Protection	$	4,869.14
l 5-Road & Bridge	$	78,323.46
16-2008 Capital Projects	$	575.00
18-County Law Library	$	309.00
26-JP Technology	$	2,825.00
27-Juv Intensive Prog-State	$	2,950.00
28-Records Mgmt & Preserv.	$	45,642.00
29-Courthouse Security	$	4,398.30
31-Parks	$	116.70
50-Indigent Health Care	$	12,733.39
76-Juv Detention Facility	$	127.69
83-216`" District Attorney	$	642.03
86-216`" CSCD	$	254.29
TOTAL $ 307,641.25
Upon motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the
Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts.
ORDER NO.31332
LATE BILL
RABIES & ANIMAL CONTROL
Came to be heard this the 8~' day of June, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioner Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-
0-0 to issue a hand check in the amount of $469.04 to Young's Jewelers for 3 guns
(combination 22/410 rifles).
ORDER NO. 31333
MONTHLY REPORTS
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 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:
Constable Pct #1
County Clerk
Environmental Health
ORDER NO.31334
REPORT OF CASH POSITION AT MAY 31, 2009 AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS FOR EIGHT MONTHS THEN ENDED AND KERB COUNTY
TREASURER PAYROLL EXPENSE REPORT FOR MAY, 2009
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 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 Kerr County Auditor -Report of Cash Position at May 31, 2009 and Results of
Operations for eight months then ended and the Kerr County Treasurer Payroll Expense
Report for May, 2009.
ORDER NO. 31335
EEOC MEDIATION
Came to be heard this the 8th day of June, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner
Letz, seconded by Commissioners Williams/Oehler, the Court unanimously approved by
a vote of 4-0-0 to:
Approve Ilse Bailey to represent the County in mediation on a pending EEOC matter on
June 29, 2009, with her authority to be subject to later approval by Commissioners' Court
for any actions that she may take.