1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT Special Session Monday, March 23, 2009 9:00 a.m. Commissioners' Courtroom Kerr County Courthouse Kerrville, Texas PRESENT: PAT TINLEY, Kerr County Judge H.A."BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 BRUCE OEHLER, Commissioner Pct. 4 v fl f~ M 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 March 23, 2009 --- Commissioners' Comments 1.1 Update from Barbara Hofmann with LCRA regarding the transmission lines project in Kerr County 1.2 Kerr Economic Development Foundation first quarter 2009 report to County Commissioners 1.4 Consider/discuss, take appropriate to approve new copier contract for Juvenile Detention Facility 1.6 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for public hearing regarding the Dangerous Animals Ordinance 1.7 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to award the annual bids for road base, cold mix, aggregate, emulsion oil, and corrugated metal pipe 1.8 Consider/discuss and take appropriate action for public hearing for the revision of plat for Lots 2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2 Subdivision 1.3 Presentation of the County Treasurer's monthly report for February 2009 to Commissioners Court for examination and acceptance 1.5 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to adopt a proclamation declaring April 2009 as Child Abuse Prevention & Awareness Month in Kerr County and approve blue ribbons to be tied on courthouse trees during the month of April 1.9 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action for approval of the final revision of plat for Lots 2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2 Subdivision 1.10 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to name a private road per 911 guidelines, Precinct 4 1.11 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to set a public hearing for Vistas Escondidas de Cypress Springs Estates, Lots 128 and 129 1.12 Presentation from Linda Werlein regarding the services provided by Hill Country Community MHMR Center PAGE 5 11 47 58 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 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) March 23, 2009 PAGE 1.13 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve the Racial Profiling Report for 2008 as submitted by Constable, Precinct 2 73 1.14 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action regarding applying for U.S. Department of Justice COPS grant 73 1.15 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action regarding Office of Justice Programs American Recovery Act of 2009 78 1.16 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to invite the community to have lunch on the courthouse grounds on Thursday, April 16, 2009 85 1.19 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on election equipment contract with City of Kerrville for 2009 City of Kerrville election 86 1.20 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action concerning current proposed state legislation 87 1.17 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on request from Heart of the Hills Barrel Racing, a 501(c)(7) organization, to be added to the nonprofit list for a reduced rate at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center 94 1.18 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action to approve a proclamation to declare May 7, 2009 "National Day of Prayer"; declare a "National Day of Prayer" on the first Thursday of every May, and allow the Commissioners Court to sign a new proclamation on that day each year 106 4.1 Pay Bills 110 4.4 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 117 5.1 Reports from Commissioners/Liaison Committee Assignments 117 1.21 Consider/discuss, take appropriate action on potential real estate acquisitions (Exec. Session) 120 --- Adjourned 120 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, March 23, 2009, at 9:00 a.m., a special meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in ' the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: P R O C E E D I N G S JUDGE TINLEY: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Let me call to order this regularly scheduled meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court scheduled and posted for this time and date, Monday, March 23rd, 2009, at -- at 9 a.m. it is that time now. Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. Would you please stand and have a word of prayer with me, and then we'll do the pledge of allegiance. (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: At this time, if there's any member of the public that wishes to be heard on any matter that is not a listed agenda item, this is your opportunity to tell us what's on your mind; come forward and tell us what you want us to hear. If you wish to be heard on an agenda item that is listed, we'd ask that you fill out a participation form. There should be some located at the back of the room. That helps me to know that there's someone that wishes to be heard 3-23-09 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 on that item. If, for some reason, there's not any participation forms, or we get to an agenda item and you haven't filled out a participation form and you wish to be heard, get my attention in some manner and I'll see that you do have that opportunity, because we want you to have the opportunity to be heard on your business. 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, come forward at this time and tell us what's on your mind. Seeing no one coming forward, we'll move on. Commissioner Baldwin, what do you have for us this morning? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Just one item, Judge. I know there's a lot of busy things going on in the community for spring and summertime, but I wanted to bring your attention to April the 4th out at the Ag Barn area. There is, that particular day -- that's a Saturday, April the 4th -- there's a gun and knife show, there's a dog agility show, and there's a Bark for Life show. I don't know if you can call that a show or not, but it's -- it's a front-runner of the Walk for Life, only everyone's going to have their -- their pets out there to do the little walk thing. And it's really, I think, raising some funds, but I think it's more to just bring attention to the big Walk for Life that's coming up a little bit later on. And for you that don't know, Daisy and myself are the Master of Ceremonies for this thing. 3-23-09 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are you barking? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm barking; she's the guest speaker. (Laughter.) And we're both -- we're both cancer survivors, so she -- I recently had one of her eyeballs taken out, so she's kind of a weird-looking dog right now, but it's going to be cute. You know, we'd encourage -- I expect all of you gentlemen out there as fellows and brothers in this operation to be there. That's all. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: While it's not on the agenda, Judge -- and maybe we can get a message back to the Auditor, 'cause I don't see her either, via the Treasurer. I think it would be good if the Court could see a six months review of the budget, actual against expenditures for the first six months of this budgetary year. I haven't seen anything. I don't know if anybody else has seen it. I think it might not be a bad idea to see a six months review. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Letz? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just one comment. It's basically based on a letter we got from TexDOT; we all got it, about some projects that are upcoming. One of them is going to affect anyone that drives east. There's going to be 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a major project starting at Wilson Creek, and they're -- TexDOT's going to add a turn lane all the way from Wilson Creek to the Kendall County line, Highway 27. It's a good project, really needed. It's right where there's -- Westwood comes in that area; Hermann Sons comes in that area. We're looking at probably possibly even expanding that project on some alignment that the County's been working on with Hermann Sons Road. Little League fields are there. It's a dangerous area. Little League season's ongoing right now in Comfort, which makes it really hectic. But I'd just encourage everyone to really be careful through that stretch. I didn't get a whole lot of precedent on whether or not -- didn't see a whole lot here, but about three weeks ago, there were two fatalities right at -- right before you get to the Kendall County line. This was in Kendall County, so it was more handled by those people. A UPS truck was hit head-on by a Kerrville resident, and both were killed at the scene. So, anyway, it's a dangerous area. Last year there was a fatality at Hermann Sons, so it is one of the more dangerous stretches, and I think this Court's talked a lot about that whole Highway 27 from Kerrville all the way to Comfort as being really dangerous. TexDOT's going to do a big project, a $1.3 million project, I presume, kicking off sometime this summer. That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler? 3-23-09 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Oh, a couple things. We have two bridge projects that are coming up that are being -- have been funded on what we know as the Arrowhead Crossing on Highway 39, and then another one at Hoot Owl Hollow. I'll be meeting with those residents of those two crossings to have kind of a pre -- pre-meeting so that everybody's kind of on the same page of what's going to happen, and so that we can do -- one of those bridges will be closed completely, probably for two days without anybody going in or out, to allow them to do some really quick work, and that'll be okay, I'm pretty sure, by the residents. And, anyway, that's going on, and also Leonard and I went to Belton last week to a floodplain seminar -- actually a class, and got a little education, and also some information of the right people to contact for certain questions that we have. Hunt bridge projects on 39 are going very well. They're pretty much on schedule. I guess that's about it. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I've got one follow-up. Talking about the bridges made me remember it. I'll be meeting this Thursday at 6 o'clock with the Cypress Creek Community along with Mike Coward related to the Lazy Valley bridge at Cypress Creek being replaced, and that's another one that I guess I kind of made the call on, that we talked to Mike Coward, and we're going to shut that road down 3-23-09 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 completely, too. A lot quicker job, rather than try to do half and half. Be a little bit of inconvenience for a while, but it'll be a lot quicker project, and I think -- and it saves a lot of money. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Saves a lot of money. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And there is an alternative route on Stoneleigh; it's not a real good route, but for a couple days, I think people -- you know, it's appropriate. But that's working as well. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The same may have to take place at 1350 when they replace the Government Crossing bridge, reroute traffic back through Center Point on Highway 27. That's coming up too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just saves them a huge amount of money. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's also going to happen when the project starts at Hunt on 1340 and Lone Star; going to shut that down for two days and completely take the bridge out, put enough box culverts in, and get it open by Monday morning. JUDGE TINLEY: Is there a decent -- or a feasible alternate route? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, all the way around. You can take your pick; you either go around to 41 or -- JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. 3-23-09 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: -- 83, or just stay home for a couple days. JUDGE TINLEY: I see. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That will be talked about with the residents much in advance so that they will understand that it will be closed. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Anything else? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: First off, I'd like to welcome the Honorable Todd Bock, mayor of the City of Kerrville, here this morning. Happy to have you here. Come anytime, along with any other folks from the City that have any interest in what we're doing here. We're happy to have you. A couple of -- couple of items. As some of you may have noticed, our courthouse grounds are beginning to have a different look. Kudos go out to our maintenance people who are handling this project, and they are assisted by some community service workers and Bobby Johnson's band of -- of jail trustees that have been doing this work. They have really packed in a whole lot of effort in a pretty short period of time. When the wind got up here a few weeks ago, it was kind of dusty around here, but hopefully we got that all settled down now. But it's really starting to look good, and if you see those guys, tell them thank you for that new look, 'cause it really looks good. They also, as you noticed, changed out the 3-23-09 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 historical markers and have that really well worked out. Our Indigent Health care people are doing an excellent job. We got a report from them that they have really, really adhered to the guidelines that -- that have been nailed down on that program, and they're doing an excellent job, and I think we're -- we're saving the taxpayers some money with that program, and I can't say enough about the good work that they're doing there, so kudos to them also. And if you see Dawn and Rosa, why, tell them good job and you appreciate what they're doing, 'cause it's saving us all a buck or two, and that's what it's all about. Let's get on with our agenda, if we might. The first item, a timed item for 9:05, is an update from Barbara Hofmann with L.C.R.A. regarding the transmission lines project in Kerr County. Ms. Hofmann, welcome. And -- MS. HOFMANN: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: -- give us your report. MS. HOFMANN: Good morning, Judge, Commissioners. I'm Barbara Hofmann with L.C.R.A., and thanks for giving us some time this morning to give you a little update on some transmission projects that may impact Kerr County. We want you to know we're sensitive to transmission projects and the anxiety that they tend to bring in the community, so hopefully we'll be able to give you a little bit more information that may be helpful to you as if you respond to 3-23-09 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 citizens that might be a little anxious about it. But before we get started, I wanted to give you a little bit of background on the state directive of these lines. In 1999, Texas wind farms constructed in west Texas and the panhandle. So, in addition to the mandate to pursue renewable energy as a component of our energy portfolio in the state, the State has also given the directive to build transmission lines to deliver the wind energy to the load centers of the state of Texas. To accomplish this, the Public Utility Commission approved a Competitive Renewable Energy Zone, CREZ, transmission plan, which included a competitive process to allow different transmission service providers, LCRA being one of them, to submit proposals for the construction of the lines. And in January of this year, L.C.R.A. Transmission Services Corporation was granted approval to construct a number of transmission lines as part of the CREZ project. These construction projects are on a very fast track, as the Public Utility Commission has directed that they want the high priority lines to be in place and energized by December 2011. Now, I've been referring to "lines," but in 3-23-09 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 L.C.R.A.'s senior regulatory case managers, Dennis Palafox and Sara Morgenroth, and Dennis and Sara serve essentially as the project managers for two of these lines that may impact Kerr County, and I'm going to ask Sara to come up now and share with you the status of our routing process. MS. MORGENROTH: Good morning. Oak is trying to kill me, so I apologize for my voice if I have to stop and cough for a minute. I'm trying to recuperate from this. As Barb mentioned, there are CREZ priority projects that have to be energized by 2011. If you are familiar with CREZ and have followed that, the P.U.C. process, four of the projects that were awarded by the P.U.C. to LCRA TSC, what we did is combined them into projects because of the fast track that we are on. We have to file our certificate of convenience and necessity in October of 2009, so we have about, from the time they verbally awarded these projects to LCRA -- because we do not have a final order from the Public Utility Commission yet. We expect that any time now. We have to file these projects in October. There will be a six-month process for 3-23-09 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the P.U.C. to make a decision on the route that will be approved and constructed, and so we're looking at about this time frame next year, we will know what that route is, and construction will begin on that route. The project that I am the case manager over begins at Twin Buttes in Tom Green County, just northwest of San Angelo. Then it goes down into Schleicher County where we will be building what they call a collector station. A collector station is similar to a substation; it's where different wind power -- wind farms can build transmission lines into a station so that the wind power can get into that station, and then it is put into the grid. The transmission lines that LCRA TSC will construct by projects, then, goes from somewhere in northern Schleicher County, wherever this station is sited and approved, through -- it will go through Schleicher County, Kimble County, Kerr County, and Kendall County, where it will end up at the Kendall substation -- LCRA's Kendall substation just outside of Comfort. So, it's about a 220-mile-long transmission line that we will be constructing that I will be overseeing. What's important to you guys is the part that's in Kerr County. As Barb mentioned, we sent you a letter. You should have received a letter from me, with my name on it, asking you for input for anything that you are aware of that could be a constraint to a transmission line project. We 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 plan accordingly as we do our preliminary links. That's what we're doing right now; we're working with our routing consultant to identify those preliminary links. Our plan is to go public and have public meetings with these preliminary links around the first couple of weeks of May. There will be a meeting held in Kerrville to give the public an opportunity to come in and talk about those links and give us their input. As we develop our preliminary links, we're also identifying landowners. In part of my project area, that's a little difficult to do. In other parts of my project area, landowner information is -- is a lot more current and accurate and easier to obtain. So, for your constituents, they will be receiving letters probably in mid-April announcing the public meetings so that they'll know. On my project, there's going to be six public meetings from San Angelo to Comfort. Anyone can go to any one of them that they want to. They can go to all six of them if they want to, or if it's not convenient to go to one and they can go to another one, the same information will be presented six times. So, we try to make it convenient. Also, there will be ads in the newspaper so that the general public will also know what's going on if they want to provide 3-23-09 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 us with input, because what we're looking for are constraints. Again, we're on a very tight schedule, mandated by the Legislature, also mandated by the Public Utility Commission. Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: What do you consider -- or what does LCRA consider a "constraint"? MS. MORGENROTH: A constraint? COMMISSIONER LETZ: What does that mean? MS. MORGENROTH: It would be something that a transmission line would cause a severe impact to. In other words, you wouldn't want to route a transmission line over a piece of property where a school was going to build a school, for example. They've purchased land; they're going to build a school. We need to know, "We purchased land; we're going to build a school here." So, if we're going to do a preliminary link there, we can go around it. Obviously, you don't want a transmission line going across a school. Same thing if you were doing a wastewater project, a water project, a major road. I noticed y'all were talking about bridges and things like that. We do -- it's not really a constraint for a transmission line to cross a bridge or cross a road, but it is helpful to know where those are at and if there's an impact, you know, where they're going to be constructed and where our links are coming in, because it might depend on the angle that we need to take. 3-23-09 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The floodplain, we take floodplain into consideration, so we need to know. Those are things that have been official -- and it doesn't even have to be, you know, what the County's doing. You guys are very familiar with the county and you're residents of the county. You may know of other things going on that are not necessarily a county project that would be beneficial to us knowing, too. So, the sooner we can be provided that information, the better, but we'll also take that information at public meetings. That's where -- I'm sure all of you are familiar with Dennis' previous project -- we'll have big aerial boards with the preliminary links on them. People can come up and look at them and say, you know, "I live here," or, "We've got this going on here." And talk to the routing consultants and to myself or to Dennis and give us that -- that input. That's what we're looking for. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I have two things. MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: One of them is, what would be wrong with using the existing pipeline right-of-way rather than taking new right-of-way? MS. MORGENROTH: There's nothing wrong with that, and I'm really glad you brought that up, because that is one of the things that LCRA tries to do, is route along existing pipelines, existing transmission lines. We try to route 3-23-09 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 along property boundaries and roads where feasible. So, absolutely, yes. If there's a pipeline out there, then we're going to look at that, because you're right. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's a wide right-of-way. Looks to me like you could acquire a little more right-of-way there and not be interfering or -- or tearing up a whole new right-of-way. ~I MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir, absolutely. That's I correct. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's cheaper. It's already cleared, and it already has access to it. MS. MORGENROTH: Uh-huh. And that's one -- and I appreciate that, and that is one thing I can write down as, you know, a comment back from the Court, is that you would like for us to look at routing along that pipeline. I know which pipeline you're talking about. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I think you'll have less resistance doing that than you will trying to establish a new right-of-way. MS. MORGENROTH: Exactly. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: And, you know, it has to be cheaper. MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir. So -- and there's some things we have to do when you have a transmission line over a pipeline, but we can do that; it's not an issue. We do 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 have -- right, and we parallel pipelines in other areas. So, that's excellent feedback, and I appreciate that. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: The other thing is that, do you have a more defined map that gives us a better idea of I, exactly where those lines that are on that without taking a magnifying glass to figure out? MS. MORGENROTH: Exactly. Right now, the map that you received from me doesn't have any lines on it at this point in time. What we were showing, trying to demonstrate to you -- and it's hard when you have a project area this big, and I apologize for that -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right. MS. MORGENROTH: -- small scale. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Somewhere between those dotted lines? MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir, the dotted lines that you saw on there. That's the -- that's the project area. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. So that means anywhere within that dotted line -- those two dotted lines and then the two end dotted lines, there could be preliminary links? Okay. MS. MORGENROTH: That's correct. Now, we will have more defined links when we go to the open houses, and then you'll be able to see very up-close maps, and we can provide you with those maps too if you want more detail. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'd really like to have that. MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir, I understand. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The other question -- and these pipelines are all going through my precinct, and a little bit through -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: They go through mine too, a MS. MORGENROTH: Okay. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The question I have is -- and I know I've already been asked, is I've -- and I don't know if y'all know; Florida Power and Light's building a private line right now, basically from Big Springs to Comfort, not a whole lot different than from Twin Buttes to Comfort. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are y'all considering, or can you consider using that same right-of-way? MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, we can. We can parallel that right-of-way. We can't put our transmission line in their right-of-way. From what we've heard from the public, it's a pretty wide right-of-way. You know, I've talked to folks in Harper; that's probably mostly where I've heard a lot about the F.P.L. line, and I know they have a really wide right-of-way of that they're purchasing. So, we can't put our line in their right-of-way, but yes, we could parallel -- that's what we would consider an existing transmission line 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 right-of-way, and we could parallel that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: But it's possible for y'all to work with Florida Power and Light to have at least -- I mean, not have to get another 180 feet. MS. MORGENROTH: We could -- we can talk to Florida Power and Light. I don't know what -- you know, how much of their right-of-way they're going to be using. If they purchased more than they needed and then they have some that they're willing to -- you know, and that's where we have a line and they're willing to sell that or work with LCRA or whatever, then yeah, we could talk to them. Because, again, it's parallelling that transmission line. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And the other question I have is on the -- how far does -- or how is it determined what type of structure poles are put up? Obviously, some are far less offensive than others. MS. MORGENROTH: Right, I understand. As Barb mentioned, this was a competitive process that we bid on projects -- to be awarded projects. Several transmission companies inside the state of Texas and outside of the state of Texas, and actually outside of the United States, bid on these projects. What we used in our construction bid were lattice towers, because they are the cheapest, lowest-cost structures. So, that is what our proposal is, is to use lattice towers. The P.U.C. commissioners have the final say 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 on what structures are used, but as far as our bid and our bid that was submitted, what we will pursue in our application would be lattice structures. JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Morgenroth? MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir? JUDGE TINLEY: I suspect it was just an oversight on your part when you mentioned this would be coming from Schleicher County. You mentioned Schleicher County, Kimble County, Kerr County, and Kendall County. Gillespie County was omitted. Is Gillespie still in the study area for -- MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir. And my apologies. Yes, sir, Gillespie County -- there is a portion of Gillespie County in my study area, and there is also a portion of Menard County in my study area, and there could be preliminary links in those counties, and that was an oversight on my part. Yes, sir, that's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: The ultimate route will be determined by P.U.C. next March or so? MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: But in the meantime, as you have these open houses, the obvious question on everybody's mind, here and elsewhere, is where's it going to be. MS. MORGENROTH: Absolutely. JUDGE TINLEY: You know, there's a lot of NIMB going on, as you might expect, but -- but people want to know 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 ~ where it's going to be, and the closer you get to that actual location, the more interest there's going to be -- MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: -- in this entire project. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Your open houses are tentatively scheduled for when? MS. MORGENROTH: The first couple of weeks of May. We have not confirmed all of those locations. Between my projects and Dennis' projects, there's going to be 11 open houses, so we're getting all of that ironed out right now. But it will be -- unless there is a slip in the schedule -- God forbid there's not, but if there is a slip in the schedule -- if there's not, they will be the first two weeks of May. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. My understanding is at these open houses, they will be -- there will be a number of more clearly defined routes. There will be a preferred route and then alternate routes designated; is that correct? MS. MORGENROTH: At the open house, they are preliminary links, so there will not be a preferred route or -- or actually any alternative routes. What you'll see is a bunch of links. It will have numbers, you know, like 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and they'll be from one point to another point, and then will traverse the entire project area. And so what 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 people will be looking at is, they'll find where their area of interest is or where they live, if they're an affected landowner, and then they will look at that link and they will be able to tell how close that link is to their property, where it's located. What might be a better option, you know, instead of going up here, go down here or go over here. So, they -- that's the first time those will be available for the public to see. Now, after the open houses, and we obtain input from the open houses, we also have questionnaires that the public can fill out. We'll take that information and what we've heard at the open houses, and that's when we start refining the links into what -- as you described, Your Honor, as a preferred route and alternative routes. And then they -- what we do is we study the alternative routes. Our consultant, PBS&J, along with LCRA, will study all of those, and later in the summer is when we would identify a preferred route, which is what we're required to do by the Public Utility Commission. JUDGE TINLEY: And that's when you would put it in the filing of the P.U.C.? MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: And that information would then become public? MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir. When we file our application in October, all the affected landowners would 3-23-09 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 receive -- and we also put it in the newspaper -- would receive a letter with the maps that show the alternative routes. It identifies the preferred route. That same information. is placed in the newspaper as public notice for two weeks, and so then everybody would be aware of what we have submitted to the Public Utility Commission, and if they chose to become involved in that process, that's when they would do that. JUDGE TINLEY: Will you be sending that out as well as making the public notifications immediately upon determining the preferred and alternate routes, or will there be some delay in those two events? MS. MORGENROTH: It -- it will take us -- the alternative routes will be identified probably sometime in June, because we have to identify those so that they can be studied, so that the routing consultant can do our environmental assessment. They can look at all the different constraints and criteria they have to look at. They put together our E.A. that we file with our application, so there's a study process that goes on for several months. As far as all of that becoming public, it does not become public until we file our application, because we are refining it until we get down to that point. And that will be -- JUDGE TINLEY: And one of those alternative routes then ultimately becomes the preferred route, normally? 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir, that is correct. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. MS. MORGENROTH: And when we file our application ', with the Public Utility Commission, no matter how many alternative routes we file along with our preferred route, our -- what we do at LCRA TSC is say everything we file, alternative and preferred, we can construct. Some are going to cost more than others; some are going to have more constraints than others or environmental impact than others, but we are basically saying when we file this, we can build any one of these. So, if the commission chooses any one of them, then we can construct that route. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. And I'm going to let Dennis talk to y'all for just a second, because his project also impacts y'all, kind of from a different perspective than mine. So, I'm going to turn it over to Dennis -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a question before you I do that. MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Did you want -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, go ahead. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Can you tell me the involvement of this Court in your program? MS. MORGENROTH: The involvement of the Court? We 3-23-09 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 seek your input on any constraints. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. Go to another county. That's our input. MS. MORGENROTH: And if that's your input, then we take that input and we record that; that was what the input was from Kerr County, "We don't want any." COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's real close to that. MS. MORGENROTH: I understand. And I think it might be helpful for you to understand -- for your constituents to understand, as Barb mentioned, this was a legislative mandate, which they mandated the P.U.C., which then mandated the transmission services providers, which we're one of them, LCRA TSC. And most of the projects that LCRA TSC does, that would be a transmission project that we ', do, because we need it for our system, the LCRA TSC transmission system; we have to provide and prove need. I There has to be a need for projects, and we have to prove that to the P.U.C. And in the case of CREZ, need has been proven through state legislation, state mandate, Public Utility Commission. So, need is there, so it's not like you can say, "We don't want the CREZ projects." That's -- that's past that, so we're to the point now where it's -- okay, as the transmission service provider, we're going to work with you and the public the best we can to get the best route for II -- you know, which in your area would be Kerr County, but 3-23-09 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 we'll have numerous routes in Kerr County. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The Commissioners Court does -- has basically nothing to do with the selection of your route or approving it or any of those things. MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir, that's correct. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: However, the taxpaying public looks to us as leaders, and expect us to try to steer it away from their back yard, as the Judge referred to. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm wondering -- you know, I notice, Dennis, mine and your bruises have kind of cleared up from our last deal here. I wonder if you can consider a constraint being a large group of angry millionaires. (Laughter.) "Keep it out of my precinct" is the -- is the whole issue. MS. MORGENROTH: And I -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: All those other counties. MS. MORGENROTH: Pick somebody else around Kerr County, absolutely. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: But I've had my turn in the I barrel. MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir, I understand. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And there's not a bit of fun in it. MS. MORGENROTH: No. There -- 3-23-09 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So don't go that way. MS. MORGENROTH: And I appreciate you for that COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're quite welcome. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It would appear that it's pretty difficult to get any intelligent review or comments from the Court until you get a little more definitive, because if I look at that block that you've got on the -- on the map with the various counties that have a heavy dark line block -- MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- block, that could come anywhere, and you tell me that can come anywhere within that block. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That could be all the way from your substation way down south on 16 through River Hills, through Comanche Trace, through Whiskey Canyon or I anywhere. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And how can we give any intelligent input until we know a little bit more about it? I can't tell you what's going to be an impediment until I have some idea of where you're going. MS. MORGENROTH: Absolutely. And -- and you're 3-23-09 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 absolutely right, Commissioner. I guess what we're asking when we send out our agency letters are any big projects or anything like that. Obviously, when we get more defined links, there will be very particular areas that could be impacted where there may be constraints. Right now, they're not -- you know, aren't coming to mind, that would come to mind when you see a line on a map, and I can completely understand that. What we're doing right now is starting with the high level, and being the County and aware of various things going on in the county, we're seeking your input right now to say, is there any big things going on? "Stay out of my precinct," that's a big thing. We got three other precincts here. "Stay out of my precinct" is -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would you like that in writing? (Laughter.) MS. MORGENROTH: So, you know, that -- that's what we're looking to you for now. And we understand that once you see those preliminary links when you receive that second letter from Dennis and I in mid-April, then, yeah, y'all are probably going to -- or, actually, when you come to the open houses, 'cause it won't be in the letter; it'll be at the open houses. Then most definitely, you're going to say, "We'd like to talk to y'all again. We have some very specific things we want to talk to you about now," and we I understand that. 3-23-09 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Ms. Morgenroth? MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir? ~I JUDGE TINLEY: Kind of as a follow-up to my earlier inquiry to you and what Commissioner Williams said, it's hard for us to have a meaningful discussion with our citizens -- MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: -- until we've got a better idea. And where I was going a while ago was, while y'all may I' identify your alternate routes, one of which will become the preferred route, way early on, it will not become public until October when you file. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Would it be possible for us to get a delineation of all of the alternate routes once it has been -- once those have been determined by your organization? You I! know, that's going to give us a little bit more head's up and the ability to talk to our -- our citizens. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: But if -- if we're delayed until October, which could conceivably be several months, -- MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. !, JUDGE TINLEY: -- we're kind of wandering around in the dark. Unless,: of course, you merely say we're going to avoid Kerr County altogether, in which case you probably won't find any further interest from this Court. 3-23-09 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. MORGENROTH: I understand. I understand. I don't have an answer to your question. JUDGE TINLEY: I'd appreciate knowing that. MR. PALAFOX: Sir, could I just say something? Judge, Commissioners, as you recall, even if we may have alternate routes and our preferred route, we don't always get our preferred route. JUDGE TINLEY: I understand. MR. PALAFOX: So, for example, in the case of Rim Rock, we had a preferred route that was not approved by the Commission. They selected another route. And even that route, with some of those links that were presented, there were some modifications. So, what we go forward with, we may have a preferred route. The Commission asks us to do that. Of course, we don't -- we don't file anything that we don't think we can build, we can't build. So, along those lines, they're all fair game, basically. And everybody's going to -- there will be a lot of opposition to any alternatives. So, we're going in there just as -- as you will, with the same information, and saying, "Yes, Commission, you asked us for a preferred route; here it is," and not knowing what we're going to get at the end of this process. So, that's why -- one of the reasons why we don't present the preferred route publicly. JUDGE TINLEY: I can see that knowing all of the 3-23-09 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 alternate routes -- not knowing where the preferred route is; you're not going to know that until there's considerable work done in that several-month span, but knowing where all those preferred routes are, you know, I see as a good news/bad news deal. The bad news is that the local citizens have an opportunity to have an earlier head's up and get organized and armed, as the case may be, to take a shot at whatever their favorite target may be. MR. PALAFOX: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: The good news is, it may well be I that during this period of time, it gives the citizens and this Court an opportunity to give you constructive information to help you come with a plan that is more palatable to the citizens at large that may be something that fits your program. MR. PALAFOX: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: You know, I see it as good news/bad news, but until we have the information which delineates all of the alternate routes, knowing, of course, that we don't have a clue which one's going to be the preferred, -- MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: -- but once we know that, we can all take a look at it, and wouldn't it be great if you got a consensus for the first time? MS. MORGENROTH: That would be awesome. Boy, I 3-23-09 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 tell you what; we'd look really good. MR. PALAFOX: One of the things I wanted to bring up in that process, I understand that with what we sent you so far, there's not a lot you can do with it, and basically, the -- the intent is to, one, just give you a notice that there's a project that we're considering. As we progress -- as Sara pointed out, the letters come out to landowners about the open house; those are coming out in about mid -- mid-April, mid- to late April. The folks along any preliminary alternative link, as she called them, within 500 feet on either side of that, will be directly noticed. Also, two weeks prior to the open house dates, we'll have, for each of those weeks, newspaper ads, notifications. Now, really, the place where we can begin and where you can begin to sink your teeth into these projects is at the open house and afterwards, not necessarily -- you don't have to wait to know a preferred route, or even what the -- what the links are. I mean, we have not, at that open house, put links together to form routes. We've just got links, and we'll study input and continue to study those as we move forward to put routes together. You know, I think your -- your input would be valuable after the open house, where you could say, "Well, we'd like to go here or stay away from there." Your input will be valuable early on at that point to help us out. You 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 don't have to wait until a preferred route, because I think the thing that sometimes people -- whether they're directly affected or there's an alternate link that goes through their property, sometimes if they see that -- if they see there's a preferred route, they kind of relax a little bit and say, "It's not coming my way," and they tend not to get as involved as they would be if -- if they got the input about a preferred route. And I think sometimes that as we move forward into a hearing and we go through that hearing process, folks may not be as well represented, and may decide not to participate in the hearing, and to and behold, you find that, you know, one of the alternate routes was selected. So, I really feel like that after the open house, that you -- you've got the information about alternative routes, and you can begin to formulate a response to us about any -- any combination of links you want to, and I think people should also consider that and stay involved. JUDGE TINLEY: Am I to understand that these links that you refer to are a combination of -- excuse me -- those links will, in fact, be the alternate routes? MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir, that's correct. MR. PALAFOX: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: So, at that point, we will know what the various alternate routes are. MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 36 JUDGE TINLEY: There's just a more infinite number MS. MORGENROTH: There's a bunch of combinations; that is correct, absolutely. MR. PALAFOX: And keep in mind, as a result of MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. MR. PALAFOX: We may add some. We may move them a MS. MORGENROTH: Mm-hmm. MR. PALAFOX: Tweak them a little bit based on this input. And so it's a -- it's a developing process that, even for us, we don't -- although we have to study something, there's always last-minute changes that come up, and so when we file the application, that's when things really get set in stone. So, your involvement -- or your input immediately after the open house will be valuable. Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Two things. Are you going to talk about the McKamie project? Is that what you're up here for? MR. PALAFOX: I am -- I'm here to talk about the letter; that's the Westwind, Kendall/Gillespie to Newton. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. MR. PALAFOX: And you've received letters on that 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 as well. Different study area, but some of it does include Kerr County. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. The reason -- I guess one of the reasons is, y'all are going to talk about the McKamie route? It comes from McKamie to Comfort also. MR. PALAFOX: Right. That would be -- MS. MORGENROTH: That would be my project, I'm sorry. Well, it's not McKamie, but -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: More west Texas rather than up at Twin Buttes. MS. MORGENROTH: You're talking about McKamie D. That's the name of the collector station that will be in Schleicher County, so it will come from Twin Buttes in Tom Green County and basically head south into northern Schleicher County. And in that area is where you would see on your map -- or you see in my letter, it says Twin Buttes to McKamie D. McKamie D is the name -- the temporary name, I should say. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's not in McKamie. MS. MORGENROTH: No, sir, it's not in McKamie. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: El Dorado. MS. MORGENROTH: Just north of E1 Dorado, yes, that's right. And why they named them all these McKamie things, I don't know, but that was -- that was something that ERCOT did. But, yes, that's -- that would be my project. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Same one? MS. MORGENROTH: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess the other comment I have is that we've probably been through this before, and, you know, I think Buster probably the most, and Bruce a little bit. He obviously didn't want it in his precinct. I don't want these in my precinct, everything else, but at the same time, you know, it puts us in a real difficult situation, other than giving guidelines to approach, 'cause I'm not going to tell you to put it in one of my constituent's yard and not another constituent's yard. I mean, that's just -- that's suicide for all of us to do that. We get -- and we -- and last time we took a general -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: True statement. COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- position statement as to what needed to be considered, and that's what I suspect the Court will do again this time. I'm not going to tell you, "Don't go through the Schwethelm Ranch up here." It doesn't make sense to do that, 'cause once it's going to be built, it's going to go somewhere, and other than get it out of Kerr County, we don't -- that's about as far as we can go on location of it. I guess I go -- I go back to one thing, just to make sure that y'all know how important this is, to me anyway. You've mentioned lattice structure. That is unacceptable from my standpoint. If there's a power line 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 39 coming through -- I don't like any of them; those things are atrocious, and there's a far better line or technology now, whether you use a concrete pole .like Florida Power and Light's using, or the metal big poles all through Kendall County, that's far preferable. Those lattice lines are very objectionable to the public. You're going through -- regardless of how this route goes, if it touches Kerr County, it's going through high-dollar real estate, and this real estate value needs to be protected as much as possible. So, I really want you to know, I hope that's being considered. MR. PALAFOX: Right. And what I've heard so far, you mentioned about what comments you -- how could you be involved; what would be effective, rather than saying put it over here or put it over there. Two things I've heard is, follow the existing right-of-way, and -- and use something other than steel lattice structures. So, I mean, that is valuable input. I will reiterate again what Sara said, that moving forward -- or when this -- it was a competitive process for CREZ, so we -- we bid the project that we bid on with -- with, as much as we could, using existing LCRA right-of-way where we had that, and also steel lattice structures, because roughly they're -- they're half the cost of -- of the single pole. Now, again, if the commissioners -- the P.U.C. commissioners tell us to do something differently, we'll do that, and so there may be 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 40 another place for input. How could the Commissioners Court be involved? Let the -- let the P.U.C. commissioners know your thoughts about that. I do know that they're very -- I think the estimates for the overall CREZ process were between 4.9 and 5 billion dollars, in that neighborhood. And they're very -- and we're very sensitive that, moving forward, that we need to make sure that our cost -- cost estimates are -- don't result in that overall value going higher than that. So, we are also -- as you mentioned, cost is -- Judge, cost is very important to the Commissioners Court. It's also important to us and the P.U.C. commissioners. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And I know I keep dominating the questions, but I want to go back to another comment I made earlier about Florida Power and Light. That, obviously, was a private line; had nothing to do with CREZ. MR. PALAFOX: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Why can't P.U.C., at this point, work with Florida Power and Light to keep from building a second transmission line when one's already being built right now, already under construction? I mean, to me, at least good-faith negotiations with Florida Power and Light are a must, to try to use that for the capacity standpoint, and from the transmission location standpoint. For LCRA or anybody else, basically, public to pay for an additional line just because it's a -- a CREZ line versus a private line, to 3-23-09 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 me, is just a waste of money. MR. PALAFOX: Mm-hmm. Well, I agree. You need to look at duplication of effort. Now, what Florida Power and Light -- Power and Light's need is for that line, I don't know what that is. It's not been studied like CREZ has. But, apparently, they feel like that there's a great enough need to spend that money, stay out of the -- the CCN siting and routing process, and -- and other than that, I don't know much about that. But I do know that, as Sara pointed out before, that we do try and parallel compatible rights-of-way, and if and when we know what that route is, and there's some way that we could develop something to parallel that, we would certainly look at that. So, that may be another question for the P.U.C. commissioners, another valuable place for your input. COMMISSIONER LETZ: All right, thank you. MS. MORGENROTH: Just one thing I want to add to that, Commissioner, is Florida Power and Light is, as you mentioned, a private company. They are not regulated by the Public Utility Commission, so the Public Utility Commission couldn't say to them, "You have to follow our process" and be part of -- and do things the way -- like, for example, LCRA has to do, so that's one of the big differences there. And there is also, from my understanding, a radial line going from a wind farm into a substation, which will be similar to 3-23-09 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 25 the collector station I described earlier out in Schleicher County. Several wind farms will tie into it to bring that wind power into the grid. So, the hardest thing for people to understand is, well, why are you regulated and why are they not regulated? Why can they just go out and do what they want to do? And that's because they're a private company; they don't fall under that regulation of the state like LCRA does. I don't know if that helps any. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I understand that. I know -- and for whatever reason, they chose to basically build a private line. My concern is that they -- that line is currently under construction. I go by it and see it every day. MS. MORGENROTH: Exactly. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And just because it's a private line, is the capacity really needed to build a second public line? MS. MORGENROTH: For CREZ, I would say yes. All the CREZ was studied by ERCOT, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas. They're the ones that, through the legislative mandate, said this is how much transmission we're going to need to bring that wind power into the -- the areas where we need it. And so it was a separate -- completely separate study, as Dennis mentioned, and F.P.L. won't be any part of that. 3-23-09 43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's my concern. MS. MORGENROTH: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LETZ: There is -- that capacity now does exist, or is going to exist, and all of a sudden we're going to have two lines of capacity. One, granted, is private, but I'm sure they're in business to make money, and they will take any power from anyone, I would think. MR. PALAFOX: If you have any other questions, I'll take those. I don't want to extend this any longer, but I did want to clarify for the project that I'm a case manager on, the Westwind-slash-Kendall to Gillespie to Newton. I don't know if you -- we said either/or; we're either going from the Westwind, which is in northern Kerr County, to Gillespie, or we're going Kendall to Gillespie, and Kendall to Gillespie was the project that was identified by ERGOT. In -- in our application, testimony of our witnesses, we presented testimony that we thought that going from Westwind to Gillespie might be a little bit cheaper, because it's -- basically, it's an existing right-of-way, and it's shorter than following from Kendall to Gillespie. And we have not -- we were -- as Sara mentioned, we have not gotten the final written order from the Public Utility Commission. We were hoping to get some idea about how you would present projects that were different from the projects that they had -- that ERGOT had proposed and the P.U.C. had approved, and we 3-23-09 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 haven't got that clarified yet. So, we -- we're going forward with both of those options. We'll -- and -- and, of course, as anything else, even though we -- we identified in our cost estimates using existing rights-of-way for both of those, we'll be -- we'll propose alternative routes along those. So, we don't know that -- we're just to the end of Point A. How we get from Point A to Point B, we'll be studying that, developing alternative routes for both of those, and, again, present them at the open house. You'll be getting letters about that, public notices. You'll also be noticed again when we file our application in October. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you taking comments? I like the Westwind approach. MR. PALAFOX: You do? It's not -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: It gets it away from Comfort. MR. PALAFOX: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Palafox, I noted another omission, and I don't know if this is Freudian or exactly what it is, but you mentioned from Westwind -- when you were talking about these two, from Westwind, and you identified it as northern Kerr County. Now, I look at the study area, and it very clearly defines northern Kerr and southern Gillespie. Is this just an inadvertent omission, or have we got something Freudian going on here? MR. PALAFOX: No, I wanted to tell you what could 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 45 be potentially affecting your county. That's -- yes, it is true that it's in -- we haven't assigned the substation yet. It could be in northern Kerr County; it could be in southern Gillespie County. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. When you said Westwind, which is northern Kerr County, that -- that zeroed it in. That put the target there. That's the way I received it. But I would urge you to be more cautious in your language, if you wouldn't mind. MR. PALAFOX: Okay, I will. I will, thank you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is there a plan at all of bringing wind energy into the city of Austin? MR. PALAFOX: Well, all of these lines, the purpose is to -- to bring wind energy to the load centers in the rest of the state, so that would be Austin, San Antonio, Houston, even Dallas for some of the projects farther north. The -- the infrastructure we're talking about here needs to be developed to bring it from west Texas to get it to this point. There are not any projects necessarily proposed going directly into Austin, because I'm -- I would assume that, based on that study, that the infrastructure is capable to handle that. But -- but there are no projects in this CREZ scenario, too, that was approved by P.U.C. that I'm aware of that brings it directly -- calls for construction of additional lines directly into Austin. 3-23-09 46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, if I have the opportunity to vote on this issue, I'll vote that the line come into Austin and then come into south of us through San Marcos and New Braunfels. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And Horseshoe Bay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And Horseshoe Bay, before it gets to us. MR. PALAFOX: Okay. Well, I know Horseshoe Bay is in the study area for my project, so -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Good luck, Dennis. MR. PALAFOX: -- I will be having talks with other folks. And we'll have -- we'll have open houses in Lampasas and Llano, and Burnet, that area. So -- MR. ODOM: Better have a back door. (Laughter.) COMMISSIONER OEHLER: We'd prefer you keep it out of the Guadalupe River Basin, too. MR. PALAFOX: Right. That's three things I hear now. But if -- I know you've got other things on the agenda, so if you don't have any other questions, I'll just... COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. MR. PALAFOX: All-righty. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank y'all for coming. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank y'all for being here. Ms. Hofmann, that was very skillful on your part. You threw out the softball stuff, and then threw the other two up there 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 47 to take the heat. Appreciate y'all being here. MS. MORGENROTH: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move on to the second item. ', It is 9:15 now, or a bit past, possibly. Kerr County Economic Development Foundation first quarter 2009 report to County Commissioners. Mr. Overby? ' MR. OVERBY: Yes, sir. Good morning, Judge Tinley and Commissioners. I just want to give you a brief report this morning, and just kind of -- you have the data that's in front of you, just kind of on a first quarter update. This same report was provided last week to your economic partners with the Kerrville City Council as far as looking at our ~I first quarter report. Again, we do this also in September and December with you at our full board meetings with KEDF. I Basically, I'll just kind of recap some of the highlights in the first quarter. Again, our economic packets that we deliver out to folks inquiring about opportunities to either expand businesses or looking at our communities was around the 30 area. Again, a lot of that information provided in there is demographic updates, a lot of incentive applications and other studies that we have provided here in the Kerrville and Kerr County community. Also, we spent the very first part of January, as you know, on a very changing deal, as we hear all the time 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 48 about the American recovery stimulus bill. Regardless of how we feel about that, it is what it is. And I can tell you that the economic partners in our community have identified those projects and have made applications, and some of those we have heard back on and some of those we've heard nothing at all at this time. But we have moved forward, and as far as real community -- our community, I will say to you, has been very aggressive and proactive in this approach. And I'm -- and I just want to applaud your efforts in doing what you've done to help stimulate that for Kerr County. Briefly, I just want to update you again, as the first quarter comes every year, we spend our first quarter of the year, first of all, a lot of times updating our information with our top ten employers and our major businesses in our community. As you know, with the situation with Mooney Airplane Company, as you saw what happened towards the latter part of last year and the downturn in our economy the last four months of last year, we really focus in on trying to get a good pulse of our community, and we interview our top employers all the time and our other businesses in our community to find out if there's any issues or anything out there that we need to be aware of and how we can help those companies. My comments back to you as we look at our top ten employers in the Kerrville/Kerr County area, most of those numbers have stayed about the same. In fact, 3-23-09 49 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 some of them have actually had a small increase in their numbers as far as employment. But, overall, besides the Mooney situation that we saw the. last part of last year, our top ten employers in our companies have kind of held their own. Now, our hearts do go out, and definitely, we are tying to help find jobs for those employees that were let go at Mooney. And there are some industries in our community, obviously, that are impacted by the slowdown of our community. Our construction business, as far as residential, is obviously slowing down in a lot of areas in our community, and again consider some of those issues on how it's important to get back to. Another thing that we're really proud to say that's made some great advancements in our first quarter is the Kerrville Greater Alamo Community College Center. As you know, they had the ribbon cutting last August at that facility. It's at a temporary site right now at Peterson Junior High on Sidney Baker; it will move to a permanent site at the Tivy -- the old Tivy Elementary on Tivy Street will be opening up January of 2010, is what their projections are. But the significant thing about that community college center, we do have all of the staff in place now. They actually have a site manager now, Curtis Thomas, who we helped in those hiring positions, and they have their full staff. But it's important that we get our work force 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 50 training courses up and involved in our community so that we community, getting their feedback on what type of courses need to be offered to help their businesses to move forward. We also have an advisory board now that's in place with major employers in our communities that serve on that advisory February doing a lot of our demographic updating, as we do throughout each year. Of course, with census work coming out next year, there'll be lots of new data, and once collected, we'll be doing a lot of major demographic updating. But we ', do spend February doing a lot of data upgrading for our community on our web site. Also, we use our January as our month for organization, to do our private contributions requests from our -- from our businesses in our community. We hosted our sixth annual economic summit meeting in the month of January, and I'm pleased to say to you, even with our economic downturn that we've had right now, our private support has continually had a small increase every year with our contributions, so we are grateful for those efforts also. I want to say briefly here this morning -- and I'll 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 51 stop here in just a few minutes, but I do want to say one significant project that we started in the month of February was a business retention and expansion survey at the Village West Industrial Park, how that impacts our community. Of course, a third of that industrial park is actually annexed in the city of Kerrville, and two-thirds of it is actually annexed -- not annexed; it's out in the county, past the city limits. Our organization was asked last year by several companies inside that park to actually do a business retention/expansion project in there to actually get feedback. Several companies are in need of wastewater services out in Kerr County west on Junction Highway, and they've been unable to have those solutions offered in the past. We are not completed with that data right now, but I will be glad to come back to you and give that report to you once it's completed. We plan on giving that information to the Kerrville City Council the end of April as far as that data, as it comes back. We've got about 85 percent of it completed. To let you know the numbers that are in that Village West Industrial Park, it's about the size of James Avery Craftsman as far as the numbers of workers that actually work in that park. And one of the issues that we're trying to do right now, understanding that 85 percent of our future growth in the city of Kerrville and Kerr County in the 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 52 next ten years is going to come from helping existing businesses already here and helping retain the businesses that we've got here, and that is a project, I think, that's going to be the tip of the iceberg that we see in our community as far as already existing businesses here that need either some solutions or some assistance to help them either expand or remain in Kerrville and Kerr County. And, like I said, there's information; once it's all compiled, we'll share that with you. I have had also the opportunity to visit with Commissioner Oehler on some other projects that we would like to also initiate after this is competed going out on Junction Highway, and also impacting the City of Ingram as they start with Phase 1 and Phase 2 and 3, potentially down the road with their infrastructure and wastewater services down the road. It's going to be really good information, I think, coming to our economic partners as we try to move forward in helping our existing businesses grow down the road, and what things are in front of us that we'll need to deal with. Also, just briefly, our economic -- our unemployment numbers in the month of December, Kerr County was at 5 percent. We did go to 5.6 percent in January, and those numbers are what we've looked at, so we're watching that. State of Texas has dropped to 8 point -- excuse me, 6.4 percent in January, and United States in February was 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 53 8.1 percent. Just briefly, some other things that are going on that we have heard back, again, we told you about the business retention survey. I'll come back and be glad to share that information with you very soon. We've had some inquiries about helping our Veteran's hospital here also in Kerrville on some projects that are ongoing. We'll keep you updated on that also. We mentioned also the workforce training meeting that will be going on. We hope to have those classes actually starting in June of this year also. I did want you to also know that the -- in the omnibus bill in Washington, D.C., the appropriations request at the House level for the second-phase funding of the design and engineering of the U.S.D.A, facility was approved for $2 million. If you recall, the first phase of funding was 1.4 million. That was approved a year ago. This is the second part of the design and engineering. It's -- again, it's hard to believe that design and engineering on a government project now is $3.4 million, but actually, it's about 10 percent of your total project, because with the new U.S.D.A. laboratory in Kerrville and Kerr County, we're actually looking somewhere about a $4 million project. Hopefully, that's what we'll be going to. But this will take us to the next level, that request. And there will be some items there that, as we move forward 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 54 with this project on how we can get construction funding in place at a -- at a reasonable time frame, will have to be dollars already of TexDOT projects that have been approved here in Kerr County that will be going on. Also, I did talk with the Airport Board -- Airport Manager this morning, and as far as Phase 2 funding for taxi relocation and the drainage project out at the airport, they still have not heard anything back as far as the stimulus opportunity with TexDOT Aviation about that, as far as funding that second phase of that project completely, 100 percent. We're still hoping for a very favorable response back. Everything that's been coming back to the Airport Board and to the Airport Manager has been very positive so far, so we're hoping that that will trickle down and help complete Phase 2. Otherwise, I can tell you that there's been a lot going on in Kerrville and Kerr County the first three months. Again, we're -- we should be very grateful to be in Kerr County, and obviously to be in Texas right now, and we do have -- yes, we do have some bumps in the road that we're experiencing, but I can also tell you, it's -- it's 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 55 better to be here right now where we're at and trying to deal with those issues. I will also say to you that we do have two new school superintendents now in our county also. I plan on getting out to Ingram and visiting the new gentleman, Dr. Stroder, who is in town. I plan on visiting with him tomorrow. I know Center Point has a new superintendent also that came on. So, otherwise, it's been a very, very busy first quarter of the year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I have a question -- couple questions, I guess. MR. OVERBY: Yes, sir? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You mentioned that we have heard back from -- I assume through Congressman Smith's office, about some of the stimulus projects that we sent forward, and we have heard back -- we have heard about some, and we have not heard about some. MR. OVERBY: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Have you identified what we have heard back, which of those? Then I have another thing I want to talk about. MR. OVERBY: The only one we have heard back, as far as the appropriations level, was for the request for the second phase of design and engineer funding. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 56 MR. OVERBY: Then you heard, of course, the press release that came out from TexDOT here about three weeks ago on the funding as in Kerr County projects, three that were going to be funded here. As far as everything else, nothing yet. COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's another one, a TexDOT letter that came out last week that added more. MR. OVERBY: Good. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: The other thing, Guy, is talking about the need for sewer opportunities, wastewater opportunities -- MR. OVERBY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- coming in from the west, and other projects that we've had in mind. You should know, if you don't already know, that we've had to abort a grant application because we were advised by the Department of Public Works at the City that their lift stations can't handle any additional flow coming in from the west. Then in a conversation I had with a City Councilman, he said, "Oh, no, no, that's not the issue at all. That's only part of the issue. Not only do we not have enough capacity through the lift stations; now we don't have enough capacity through the pipes." So, I don't know where all that takes us, but -- except to say that we had plans to try to find the funding to do these things, and now we've had to put that on the back 3-23-09 57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 burner. So, whatever you can do to speed that process along and correct that situation with the City, God love you. MR. OVERBY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Guy, my question is, do y'all -- do you have a number of the slowdown in the construction, residential and construction? Do y'all track that? MR. OVERBY: To what number? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, just to -- I mean, have y'all tracked, like, housing starts or -- MR. OVERBY: Inside the city of Kerrville, it's a lot easier to -- to find out what those numbers are. I know that -- I know from the '06 -- okay, October 1st, '06 through September 30th of '07, there's, like, 104 new start-ups of residential in the area. Then the following year, from October lst of '07 to September 30th of '08, it had dropped off to 70, so it was about a 32 percent drop-off as far as new residential development. Part of my deal when I visit with businesses, of course, I talk to financial institutions all over, and you're hearing the feedback that it's definitely dropping off significantly as far as your construction, residential is. To actually gauge those other numbers from the city, I just haven't got onto that as far as those numbers, but it is dropping off. And there is -- I mean, it's a slow-down. There's obviously a slow-down that's going on right now. But we'll try the have some more 3-23-09 58 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 accurate numbers for you here next time. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Y'all -- but there's -- I guess, historically, we haven't tracked -- or don't have a mechanism to track county-wide? MR. OVERBY: We've talked about it, and we've talked about ideas, I guess, through sewer, through those type of hookups. And -- and, you know, there's probably a way of doing that, and probably that's something we can try to see if we can get our arms around sometime to do. But it's a little bit harder to gauge with those numbers, with that. But it is definitely something we might be able to try to do. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions for Mr. Overby? sir. We appreciate you being here. MR. OVERBY: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: And we appreciate your work. MR. OVERBY: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go now to our 9:30 item. Item 4, to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to approve a new copier contract for the Juvenile Detention Facility. I Mr. Stanton? MR. STANTON: Yes, sir. We -- we currently have a 3-23-09 59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 We've been working to try to get out of that contract. They finally agreed to let us out of that contract at no cost -- further cost to the County, and we've been able to reduce our monthly cost from $400 a month down to $240 a month for the same equipment, with an overall savings of about $1,800 over the next two years. JUDGE TINLEY: Has the County Attorney reviewed the new proposed contract that you're asking us to approve today? MR. STANTON: No, sir, not yet. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Is it with the same provider, or a different provider? MR. STANTON: It's through Ikon. It's the same provider, yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: There was a -- there was a need to downgrade the level of service based upon the prior use of the facility? Is that what caused the -- okay. MR. STANTON: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move approval of the contract subject to the attorney -- County Attorney's review and approval. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval as indicated, subject to County Attorney's review 3-23-09 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 and approval. Question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank you very much, Mr. Stanton. '~ MR. STANTON: Thank you, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move to our first 10 a.m. timed item; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for public hearing regarding the dangerous animals ordinance. Was this matter set as a public hearing, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Very well. At this time, I will recess the Commissioners Court meeting, and I will convene a public hearing dealing with the public -- with the dangerous animals ordinance that's presently in existence in Kerr County. (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:14 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open court, as follows:) P U B L I C H E A R I N G JUDGE TINLEY: Is there any member of the public that wishes to be heard concerning the dangerous animals ordinance presently in existence? (No response.) 3-23-09 61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Seeing no one coming forward, I will close that public hearing. (The public hearing was concluded at 10:14 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) JUDGE TINLEY: And I will go to -- I will reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting, and I will go to Item 7, another 10 a.m. item, to consider, discuss, take appropriate action to award the annual bids for road base, cold mix, aggregate, emulsion oil, and corrugated metal pipe. Mr. Odom? MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: I see that you've got everything MR. ODOM: I believe so, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: -- your review of the bids and your recommended awards, as indicated in what you've transmitted to the Court. MR. ODOM: That is correct. If you wish, I'll go through it. But -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the awards as recommended by the Road and Bridge Administrator. Question or discussion on the motion? All in 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 62 favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. ~I (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We will -- I will now again recess the Commissioners Court meeting and convene a public hearing dealing with the revision of plat for Lots 2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2. (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:15 a.m., and a public hearing was held in open court, as follows:) P U B L I C H E A R I N G JUDGE TINLEY: Mr. Odom, first let me get this cleared up. Was this set for public hearing today, or are you asking for one? MR. ODOM: I would request -- no, we already had a public hearing. Right, Kelly? MS. HOFFER: No, this is for the public hearing. II COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This is for the public hearing. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, then what we've done is correct. We're holding a public hearing concerning that revision of plat for Lots 2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2 -- MR. ODOM: Right. JUDGE TINLEY: -- Subdivision located in Precinct 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 63 2. Is there any member of the public that wishes to be heard dealing with the revision of the plat for Lots 2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2 Subdivision? (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Seeing no one coming forward, I will close that public hearing. (The public hearing was concluded at 10:16 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court meeting was reopened.) JUDGE TINLEY: And I will reconvene the Commissioners Court meeting, and let us quickly go to Item 3, presentation of County Treasurer's monthly report for February 2009 to Commissioners Court for the Court's examination and acceptance. Ms. Williams? MS. WILLIAMS: Good morning. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Morning. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Morning. MS. WILLIAMS: You have in front of you the February report -- Treasurer's report. It's pretty standard. If there's any questions, I'll be happy to answer them for JUDGE TINLEY: Any questions for Ms. Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. 23 24 25 report 3-23-09 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we accept and approve the accept it, I guess. Move we accept the report as you. 64 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item and acceptance of the report. 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. MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's move now to Item 5, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to adopt a proclamation declaring April 2009 as Child Abuse Prevention and Awareness month in Kerr County, and approve blue ribbons to be tied on the courthouse trees during the month of April. Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. One of the most important months of the year is to bring awareness to this -- this issue, Child Abuse Prevention and Awareness month in Kerr County, and we are -- we have the proclamation before you, as well as we are asking permission from you wonderful, smart, wise, and handsome men to be able to tie the ribbons around the trees out on the courthouse lawn, just to bring 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 65 focus on this issue. I move for approval, actually. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's move to Item 9; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action for the approval of the final revision of plat for Lots 2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2 subdivision. Mr. Odom? MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Mr. Frandolig owns Lot 2A; i it's 5.01 acres in Pecan Valley No. 2, and he wishes to subdivide his 5.01 acres into Lot 2A-l, 2.01 acres, and the other lot, 2A-2, into 3 acres. Pecan Valley uses Aqua Texas for their water service and have submitted a letter stating the approved water availability for the additional lot. The subdivision of Lot 2A would put the total number of lots in Pecan Valley No. 2 at 45 lots. The maximum number of lots in Pecan Valley No. 2 is 74 lots. At this time, we ask that you accept the final revision of plat for Tract 2A in Pecan Valley No. 2. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. 3-23-09 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Second. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item. Question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. We'll move to Item 10, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to name a private road per 911 guidelines. Mr. Odom? MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. The requested road name in Precinct 4 is Old Spanish Trail West. This road is currently unnamed. The location is Highway 27 between Dickey Road and Littlefield Road West. These proposed unnamed roads meet Kerr 911 guidelines. At this time, we ask your approval of naming this road Old Spanish Trail West. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: So moved. 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.) 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 67 JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. We'll move to Item 11; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to set a public hearing for Vistas Escondidas de Cypress Springs Estates, Lots 128 and 129. MR. ODOM: Yes, sir. Mr. Nelson owns Lots 128 and 129 in Vista Escondidas de Cypress Springs Estates. He would like to combine Lots 128 and 129 to make one lot, 128-R. At this time, we ask the Court to set a public hearing for April the 27th, 2009, at 10 a.m. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the agenda item to set a public hearing April 27th, 2009, at 10 a.m. 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: We are down to a 10:30 item. Ms. Werlein, do you have all of your people here? Are you ready to proceed? MS. WERLEIN: Close enough. JUDGE TINLEY: The option would be that we could take a break and then you can come back after the break. I suspect you'd like to go now, wouldn't you? 3-23-09 68 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. WERLEIN: Whichever one you want. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's go ahead and do Item 12, a presentation from Linda Werlein regarding the services provided by Hill Country Community M.H.M.R. Center. MS. WERLEIN: Thank you, Judge and Commissioners, for the opportunity to come and talk about Hill Country Community Mental Health and Mental Retardation Center. Our mission is to promote independence, community integration, and recovery. Hill Country at one time had two administrative offices, and that was in the year 2000, and we have consolidated those offices. We had one in San Marcos and we had one in Kerrville, and we have consolidated those offices so that they are all located in Kerrville, which meant some of the employees that resided in San Marcos had to move to Kerr County. This has occurred over -- since 2002. We have -- with our headquarters here, we have 10 mental health clinics, eight mental retardation centers, and nine early childhood intervention centers. Hill Country covers 19 counties. And at this time, I'd like to thank Judge Pat Tinley for serving on our Board of Directors. We have a population of 562,035, and we cover 22,593 square miles. We serve 5,581 adults, 1,051 children, 241 individuals who are I~, -- who are covered through Texas Correctional Office on ~I ~I Offenders with Medical and Mental Impairments. We serve 761 individuals who have mental retardation. We have 1,846 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 69 children through our early childhood intervention program, which is from ages zero to three, and we have 242 substance abuse consumers. Kerr County residents that are served are 998 individuals with mental illness, 116 children with mental illness, 62 individuals with the Texas Correctional Office on Offenders with Medical and Mental Impairment. We have 72 people who have mental retardation, 162 children from the ages of zero to three in our early childhood intervention program, and we have 94 people that we are treating with substance abuse issues, for a total of 1,504 clients that are being served through Hill Country M.H.M.R. Center in Kerr County alone. Our budget center-wide over the 19 counties is 28,249,173. We have 472 employees. The annual wages for Kerr County is 4,021,263, with 121 employees. There's over 8,645,484 annual investment in Kerr County employees and services. That's rental, buildings, leases of that kind, that are invested by Hill Country M.H.M.R. Center. After we open the crisis stabilization unit, we will be having an annual wage budget of $5,617,523, with 159 employees, an over 10,833,875 annual investment in Kerr County employees and services. At this time, I'd like to introduce some of the people that are here with Hill Country today. Did Peter come in? Okay, Peter's not here, but Peter Steeghs is our manager 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 70 of our Hill Country -- of our Kerr County clinic from our Special Opportunities Center. We have Mark Paddock who directs that. From the Kerr County Homespun, the director of that is sick today, so he was unable to be here. The adult substance abuse program, Judy Gardner, who runs that, is over at Fredericksburg today. Our Villa Del Sol, which is our male adolescent residential substance abuse services, Phyllis Guderian is director of that. And our TCOOMMI, or our Texas Offenders with Medical and Mental Illness, is Janice Kennemer, and she is here today. And David Weden is here as Development Officer with our administrative offices. Within i your handout, there's also a map -- I'm sorry, a -- a design of the new crisis stabilization unit, and also our annual report. I will be more than happy to answer any questions ~'i that you may have. I~ JUDGE TINLEY: Let me get those Kerr County numbers from you again. Number of personnel? MS. WERLEIN: 159 after the crisis stabilization unit opens next month. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And that constitutes a payroll of? MS. WERLEIN: Let's see. 5,617,523. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Right here. MS. WERLEIN: And the investment is 10,833,875. JUDGE TINLEY: Pretty significant. Thank you. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 71 MS. WERLEIN: Yes, sir. And, of course, that's not counting the commitment fees. And there is Peter Steeghs. Any other questions? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Linda, this -- this drawing of the stabilization unit, that's intended to go to 16 beds? MS. WERLEIN: Yes, sir, that is 16 beds, and that's for a purpose. At 16 beds, we can also draw down Medicaid funds, that if you have over 16 beds... (A noise was made by the sound system.) COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It's not you. MS. WERLEIN: Okay. If you have over 16 beds, you COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. We've been down this road, I think, before in terms of determining availability for Kerr County residents. Would you just touch on that, ~ please? MS. WERLEIN: Well, by virtue of the fact you're located here, it's going to be the most available to you. Everybody is very concerned about us always being full, and I am, as the administrator of it, very concerned about it staying full. So, don't forget, we have state hospital beds in Austin State Hospital, in San Antonio State Hospital. We did not pull out all of our state hospital beds, so it is available to Kerr County. If it were not available to Kerr County -- and that would be the realization of my dreams, 3-23-09 72 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 because it would mean that the unit stays full. If it were not, then Sheriff Hierholzer and his staff and the Chief of Police and his staff would simply drop the individual off. There would be an assessment made, and then we would send them to the next -- we would do that. We would do the transporting ourselves. That is not just for Kerr County; that is any county that's admitting to our crisis stabilization unit. Does that respond to your question? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank you. Appreciate it. MS. WERLEIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Linda, in regards to the new parking lot for this unit, I want you to know that -- that I fought hard to get that thing put in. And one of your own board members -- one of your own board members has caused stumbling block after stumbling block. (Laughter.) MS. WERLEIN:. I cannot even imagine that. You're just so -- you're just so generous, -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I know. Well -- MS. WERLEIN: -- Commissioner, and I appreciate all the hard work you do on that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You're welcome. You're absolutely welcome. Happy to serve. MS. WERLEIN: That's what I say every day. We're only here to serve. JUDGE TINLEY: Any more questions for Ms. Werlein? 3-23-09 73 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Not after that.. MS. WERLEIN: Not after that? Thank you so much. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, Ms. Werlein. We appreciate that report. It's 10:30. We are miraculously back on schedule. We'll take about a 15-minute recess. (Recess taken from 10:30 a.m. to 10:55 a.m.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's come back to order, if we might, from our mid-morning recess. We will go to Item 13; consider, discuss, take appropriate action to approve the racial profiling report for 2008 as submitted by Constable, Precinct 2. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Report is required by law. It's been submitted, and I 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: That motion does carry. Let's go to Item 14; consider, discuss, take appropriate action regarding applying for a U.S. Department of Justice COPS, which is Community Oriented Policing Services, grant. Sheriff 3-23-09 74 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think the attachment shows that this is part of the stimulus package that President Obama has come out with, and it's similar to the S.R.O. grant that we did a number of years ago where the County -- it pays for the officers for three years; County has to guarantee the fourth year. Except in this one, there is not a match at all. In that -- in the S.R.O. grant, it used to be a, you know, 25 percent match first year, 50, and then 75. But in this one, they've taken that out. They will pay 100 percent of the officer for the first three years, and the County has to guarantee the fourth. Now, there's a lot of agencies that are going to be applying for it. I know the City of Kerrville's also applying, so I don't have any idea how far their funding is going to,go. But we're at the point that, even this budget year, this coming-up budget session, I was going to be asking for officers, and I thought if we can get them paid for for the next three years, I would like to try and apply for this now. And what I had in mind is one officer per shift, and then another one that would either have to be into narcotics service or in our civil department where we're really starting to hurt. So, it would be a total of five officers. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are you asking for five under the grant? 3-23-09 75 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's what I'd like to ask for, is five under the grant. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: First budgetary impact would be what and how much? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Would be four years from now, and probably, based on -- and Eva's not here, having her surgery, but I'm guessing with benefits and everything, you're possibly talking close to 50,000 a year per officer. It would be somewhere in that area, so you're talking five would be close to 250,000 on the fourth year. JUDGE TINLEY: But you -- it was in your normal plan going forward to ask for more officers anyway? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes, it was. JUDGE TINLEY: Because of growth in the county, call numbers and all that sort of stuff? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. We're -- we're at the point now, we're doing -- if everything's perfect, we've got five officers on patrol at a time. That's if nobody's on vacation or -- or in a school or anything. And that is five for 1,100 square miles. With the growth the county has, I just can't -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask a question before you get to whining too much here. The -- I told you I was I ~, through being nice. Why do you say that at the end of four years -- 3-23-09 76 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ___ SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's at the end of three. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: At the end of three years. Does this grant run out in three years and it's not SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And we know that? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's right. Grant pays for three years; the County has to guarantee paying the fourth year. That's part of the grant guidelines. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, I see. Okay. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For how long? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They have to guarantee the one year, the fourth year. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For one year. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then we're locked in forever. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: By then, you're not going to -- I don't see us being able to cut patrol or, you know, cut five officers out of the county. But as far as the grant is, they pay for the first three, and then the County has to guarantee in the grant paying for the fourth. And then after that, it's what the County -- if there were, you know -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we apply for the grant, this 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 77 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's reluctant, let me tell I You . COMMISSIONER LETZ: The approval -- I have some questions when it comes to the approval of it. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: There's a lot of different things that have to be met. This is just the first step. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: The thing about it is, it's probably going to happen anyway; we might as well get three years of money. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. Well, I agree with that. I just -- you know, we can -- no reason to worry about a whole bunch of details until we get the money. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, we won't hear about it again until the fourth year when you say, "You guys approved 3-23-09 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 it; you got to raise your budget $250,000." COMMISSIONER LETZ: You got to approve the grant. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Of course, that's what the governor is -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's that string. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- turning back. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's the string. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's an old string -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: String deal. Well, I mean, just, you know, a commitment kind of thing, I don't know -- unemployment, is that what it is? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, let's move to Item 15; consider, discuss, take appropriate action regarding Office of Justice programs, American Recovery Act of 2009. What's the acronym for that, Sheriff? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Don't know. It's actually the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They call it the American Recovery Act. What this is, Kerr County and the City of Kerrville both have already been allocated a certain amount of funds. The County's allocation for use of law enforcement and public safety stuff is $12,689. I'd like -- I'm requesting permission to go ahead and fill out the paperwork 3-23-09 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 to apply for that $12,689. What that will help us do is, as y'all know -- and later, in the ending remarks or reports from department heads, I'll give you a letter -- is we have talked numerous times about our radio situation and where we're headed. S.E.C. did it with TV's; now they're going digital. Radio's getting the same way. We got 96,000 last year in a grant to help replace a lot of the car radios and portables. We had applied for some more through that state Homeland Security grant. We got denied it the other day. We still have another large amount that we have applied for again. Plus I would like to use this 12,689 to also replace a few of the other radios. These digital radios we're having to go to -- with car radios, what we've been used to paying for the VHS has been about 500, 600 a radio. These are running 1,800 to 2,000 a radio. So, it's just -- we're looking at some very major expenses in the county for our law enforcement radio system, and we're trying to do everything we can to get some grant money to pay for what we need. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is this Homeland Security or C.J. money? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This here is -- well, the Homeland Security we got denied, the -- the second part. Now, C.J. has got some more coming up, I think. Clay's handling the grant stuff for me, which was already figured in. And that will be released here before long for the -- 3-23-09 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This go through AACOG? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This does not. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay? The next round that we're also trying to get radios through is going to go through AACOG. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: This is Bureau of Justice. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Is there any chance that the digital stuff will get less expensive as time goes on? Or it's only going to go up? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Only going to go up, from what I see. And this, we're taking care of a lot of the peripheral stuff, and in the letter, you'll see we put together kind of a three-year plan. But -- but a major, major concern is, we're going to end up having to bite the bullet -- the County is -- for anywhere from one to 1.3 million to fix our simulcast radio system. That's what the tower stuff and the microwaves are going to cost. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: What's your jail expense? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: That's going to probably be about -- if you really want to know, that's going to be close to about six to seven million. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Yeah. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 81 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Okay? So, you're talking in the next, probably, five years or so, we're -- realistically, you're looking at spending close to 8 to 10 million on that deal. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, buying the new radio system, et cetera, what would you do with some of the older radios that you take out? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: A lot of those, what we're doing is moving those to the jail, the portable radios. The car radios, we'll probably auction some of those off after I the -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Would it be -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, actually, what we have looked at doing is giving some to Road and Bridge. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say it again? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Road and Bridge will get some of those. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's what I want to hear you say. Now, you know -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: 'Cause it's VHS. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't see a liaison between us and Road and Bridge. So -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I thought you were it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I am now. So, if he wanted to do that, transfer some radios over to Road and 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 82 Bridge and coordinate that effort, who are you going to talk SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I'm going to talk to Len Odom.. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. That's a good idea. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: And that's who Clay already has been talking to. That has been our idea to do. It's just one -- you know, there is going to be some frequency changing that will have to be reprogrammed in those radios for Len. We do intend on leaving our Sheriff's Office channel in there, which I think will help him out a lot, and us when we have fire situations that we need to get ahold of somebody with Road and Bridge. Right now, we're -- we're -- as you know, there's been -- so I think it can help them greatly to have our -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Fire and floods, you can I actually communicate. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Very wise. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Rusty, this is radios, right? How is -- where are you fitting this into one of these categories? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Under -- on this, Clay had already made those phone calls. It's under some of the different public safety stuff. 3-23-09 83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think it's construction of jails on tribal lands. It's not that one, is it? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, it's not that. It does fall under the -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: I see lots of them about child pornography. I see stuff about -- SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: No, we already called the Department of Justice, and the radios do fit under that interoperability stuff, is what they have found. That's what we're going to put. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are there any strings attached that we're aware of yet? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: To this one, no. There will be another one coming up that I am going to also ask that they're doing in rural law enforcement, and it has to be used for certain things. Part of that is going to be correctional. And if y'all will remember, it came out of the federal government a few years ago, and the State took all the money and kept it. That's the federal prison rape prevention act, where you have to have cameras in your jails, anywhere that a person could be assaulted or sexual abuse could take place. And in our estimate we sent back to the Legislature on that, how many -- the upgrades and the cameras it would take in our jail, and the cost would be about another quarter of a million dollars and about 50 more 3-23-09 84 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 cameras. And then you have to have the manpower to monitor all those cameras. If that -- so, that would put about 100 cameras in our jail, just monitoring that. So, the next -- I'm offtrack. We'll stay with the issue. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Did you get offtrack? Derail? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, I got the throat clearance. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Caught you at it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What are we doing? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I just want permission to apply for that 12,000 -- what was it? COMMISSIONER LETZ: 689. SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: $12,689 be used for purchasing radios. It's already been allocated. City of Kerrville had 24,000, I think, allocated -- 29,771. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Move approval. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval. Question or discussion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just a -- a reluctant vote. I don't know if y'all read the title of this thing; it's pretty objectionable, in my opinion. But, anyway... JUDGE TINLEY: Any other questions or comments? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 85 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: Motion does carry. We'll go to Item 16; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to invite the community to have lunch on the courthouse grounds on Thursday, April 16th, 2009. Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. That's just a date that I kind of threw out there. And then I got to thinking about, what is going to be the status of this grass and our yard on April the 16th? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Wet. I would push it back a little bit. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, yeah, I'd be happy to I do that. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The reason, it takes a pretty heavy watering in the warm weather. It's going to take about three weeks to get that grown in pretty decent. And it's about three weeks away, but it's not as warm as it should be -- I mean, as we'd like to have it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, like, mid-May? ~ Mid-May -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Certainly, yeah. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- would be better? 3-23-09 86 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Perfect, yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That way, we can call it the Buster Baldwin birthday, and then people can bring gifts. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I thought you were buying lunch. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I thought he was providing lunch for sure. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Nay, nay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: He said entertainment and entertainment. JUDGE TINLEY: There's some that suggest that you I do that now. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm too busy today. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think early to mid-May would I be fine. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, sometime in mid-May, we can have -- we're having a lunch on the grounds and et cetera and so forth. Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let's move on to Item 19; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on election equipment contract with the City of Kerrville for the 2009 City of Kerrville election. I put this on the agenda at the request of Brenda Craig, the City Secretary. This was just a 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 87 repeat of -- of the prior lease agreement that we've had with them on the use of our election equipment on a prior occasion. The Court has previously approved the rates, and this is a master contract that we do with all of the entities; schools, City, whatever, that use that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Move for approval. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval. Question or discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Let's go to Item 20; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action concerning current proposed state legislation. That is broad enough. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: How big is this going to get? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, I just wanted to keep Rex happy. Didn't want to get too specific on this, and I -- I put on it there kind of as a placeholder more than anything else. The bill that the hill country counties have been working on has been -- was filed by Representative Rose. Interesting, the history on that. It was filed and it went to Land Use, some other -- whatever that committee is. He 3-23-09 88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 didn't like the committee it went to, so he refiled the same bill again and put some pressure on the Speaker, and it went to County Affairs, which is where he wanted it to go. Which it's interesting, you know, how politics work up there. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: He's probably right. County I Affairs is -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's probably where it is. I'm handing out -- I wrote -- there has been some issues. Representative Rose has wanted Representative Hilderbran to sign onto this as cosponsor. Representative Miller already has, and I think Representative Aycock has, and they're those main counties involved. I sent this letter last week -- just want to hand it out to the Court -- asking Harvey to do that, to sign on with that bill. He and I have been playing phone tag. I've talked to his staff and his -- or he's talked to my voicemail; I've talked to his voicemail a couple times. We're working through that. And he's -- I suspect he's getting some pressure not to support all of the bill, which isn't a surprise. We knew the homebuilders were not real enthusiastic of some of it. But I just -- I'm still working with him on that, and just wanted to -- I suspect before we meet again, we will be having a -- we'll -- there will be hearings in Austin, and I plan to testify at those hearings on this bill, and I just kind of wanted to let everybody know on the Court. 3-23-09 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Commissioner Letz, didn't we -- didn't we pass a resolution out of this court in support of the legislation? COMMISSIONER LETZ: We supported the -- the three COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Right. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those are contained in the legislation. I didn't see really the point -- Representative Rose really asked that we support it -- a new one, support it, the bill number in it. But I just -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And in this particular bill, this 2167, is more than those three components? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Those three components. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It's those three. So, that sounds like that we've done a resolution, basically, supporting -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- this bill. Why don't you fire another copy to Mr. Hilderbran? JUDGE TINLEY: Won't be necessary, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh. JUDGE TINLEY: I -- I sent him a copy of that resolution when I noted that he hadn't signed on, suggesting that I'm sure he'd either misplaced or had not been made aware of our resolution, so I enclosed a copy for him. 3-23-09 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, interestingly -- JUDGE TINLEY: I think I referenced this particular bill number, too. COMMISSIONER LETZ: He's aware of it. His words to me were, "There are some issues," and I understand that. He's working through it. His comment -- I think it was a message to me. What he said the other day was that he intended to get on board with this during the amendment process or the hearing process, something like that.. Or he hopes to or will be able to, or something like that. That's where he is. His -- of his other hill country counties, Llano and Mason have also supported similar resolutions. Kimble County voted not to do a resolution, and they're going to be taken out of the counties that this will be impacted by. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When's the deadline for him coming on board? COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's really, I think, just a -- you know, anyway, the reason there's pressure to get on board, Representative Rose -- I mean, the bill won't pass as-is without Harvey getting on board. It won't happen. And Representative Rose, I think, has unofficially said to save the bill, he'll take Kerr County out, which will be -- I don't think would be -- not a good thing for us. And I think the people that this gives a little bit of the focus on, 3-23-09 91 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 things like wind farms which you hear about, this bill would enable us to put at least some setback requirements on wind farms. And we hear that comment frequently in Gillespie County. That's one of the reasons they're in favor of it, because of that setback requirement that we can put on properties for various commercial/industrial type uses. That's one thing, aside from just our platting processes are made a lot easier. Impact fees, you know, I told -- I told Harvey and his staff, that can be fought at the local level in Kerr County. I really don't think it's that big an issue for Kerr County at this point, but in Hays and Comal it is. They have a huge -- bigger problem with some of the these very, very large developments. As an example, those that drive into Austin, you see this development called Belterra. That's a county development, and it -- I thought it was in some city. It's, you know, thousands of homes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: About 3,000 homes. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And then the county's struggling how to work on those roads, the impact and all of that. So, there are some things -- so I think that from -- you know, there's -- all of these items are done case-by-case and then put before a vote of the county. This isn't, you know, granting us authority to do it. It goes to the voters of Kerr County before anything's done, so I really -- I don't see it's that objectionable. 3-23-09 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 BALDWIN: Did you tell us Kendall COMMISSIONER LETZ: Kimble is out. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Kimble. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah, Kendall is in. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry. Yeah, I couldn't figure out why Kendall -- COMMISSIONER LETZ: Kimble. And I can -- you know, Kimble County, at this point, probably doesn't need it. I -- they could have done it, and they wouldn't have to do anything. And the other issue has come up as to what the cost of this bill may be to counties, and I just don't see it's any additional cost to the counties. I think it's a possible -- getting revenue into the county. Any additional work done, I mean, can be passed on to the developers. I don't see it as any cost. JUDGE TINLEY: You mentioned that Representative Hilderbran had some other counties in the district that -- that had passed resolutions in support of this bill for their -- for their county. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct. That was Llano and I Mason Counties. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And with the exception of Kimble County, all of the counties that are included within the bill have been supported by the appropriate 3-23-09 93 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 representative, with the exception of Representative Hilderbran, as to those counties within his -- within his district; is that correct? COMMISSIONER LETZ: With the exception of -- and I'm not positive what Representative King's done in Uvalde -- King's Uvalde or Medina. Medina or Uvalde; I'm not positive. I believe they've both passed resolutions, but I could be wrong on that. The only core hill country county mentioned that did not is Blanco County did not pass a resolution, or Judge Guthrie. However, I asked Representative Rose, and Representative Rose says that he has no problem with Blanco County not passing it. I think Representative Rose may live in Blanco County. I'm not sure where he lives, but anyway, I know there's a lot of signs over there. But that's one of those counties. All of Representative Miller's counties signed on board. Representative Aycock only has Burnet County; he's on board. So -- JUDGE TINLEY: Let me come at it from a different direction. All of the counties that are within Representative Hilderbran's district that are within this bill have passed resolutions in support of the bill, or the principles of the bill? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Except Kimble County and Junction, and they're going to be taken out. Yes, that's a correct statement. 3-23-09 94 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. And he's not yet on board. COMMISSIONER LETZ: He has not signed on board officially; not a bill officially at this point. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, I think that's what we need to know. And we're being held hostage, as are two other COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, you know, we're -- and I'm continuing to visit with him; we're having regular conversations. Anyway, I just wanted to give everybody the update of where that bill was. I JUDGE TINLEY: Ain't representative government wonderful, Buster? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know. No saben nada. (Laughter.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. It's 11:15, so let's go to Item 17; consider, discuss, and take appropriate action on request from Heart of the Hills Barrel Racing, a 501(c)(7) organization, to be added to the nonprofit list for a reduced rate at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center. Ms. Wetz? MS. HYATT: No, I'm Donna Hyatt. JUDGE TINLEY: Donna Hyatt, all right. And you're here on behalf of Ms. Wetz? MS. HYATT: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. And your residence is where? 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 95 MS. HYATT: Ingram -- Mountain Home, Texas. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay, thank you. MS. HYATT: We have barrel races for the children, and the adults also are there. And we do it in several counties; Mason, Llano, Stonewall, Harper, and we would like to have one here also. But the rates on the building is too high for us, and we can't afford it and give the kids their saddles and their awards. So, we're asking for a reduced rate, 'cause we are a nonprofit. And Mr. Baldwin had mentioned if we did scholarships, and I talked to Diane just a moment ago, and she said that we would do scholarships. The $1,000 that we would have to pay extra on the building, we would take part of that and do scholarships for the ~ seniors, instead of having to pay for the building. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You would be adding scholarships to your program? MS. HYATT: Yes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Is that what you're saying? You haven't done that in the past? MS. HYATT: No, we haven't, but we would do that. And, like, this last year, we gave away 18 saddles. Fifteen went to our youth, three went to adults, and we gave 75 buckles away. The $1,000 that we would be paying you would take away one saddle and eight buckles. But we would take part of that money and it would go to scholarship funds for 3-23-09 96 1 seniors. 2 3 these ba 4 5 6 a list? 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. HYATT: I do not have a list. Do you not have COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No. COMMISSIONER LETZ: No. But the -- I mean, you -- I don't need the names. I mean, are they -- MS. HYATT: They're from Ingram, Boerne, Bulverde, Bandera, Medina, Mason, Midland, Fredericksburg, Harper, Llano, Stonewall, Mountain Home, Kerrville, from all over. Hondo. They participate. And when they come here, we furnish the place for them to run, but they fuel up here, they eat here and they shop here, so they spend money in the community. COMMISSIONER LETZ: I guess, you know, just so you understand, I guess, a little bit my position -- I'm not sure about the rest of the Court, but this has been an issue, is that that facility costs the county a lot of money, and we have kind of come down on the side that if it's -- the purpose of it is to benefit the community as a whole, you know, we've granted reduced rates, or reduced rentals. This organization -- your organization, it appears to me that it benefits your organization. I mean, there's not -- nothing being done for the community as a whole out of it, and that's 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 97 why -- MS. HYATT: We spend money, though, at your restaurants. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, every entity -- organization that comes into Kerr County for any kind of event spends money here, and we want that. We certainly aren't making a lot of money out there. We're trying to minimize our losses on that facility.. And, you know, it's just -- we can't let everybody use it free. That's just -- you know. I hope your organization, you know, comes and uses it. But I can't support, you know, supporting reduced rates for an organization that basically uses -- you know, the organization's for the benefit of its members or participants only. MS. HYATT: Even if most of them are children? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yeah. I mean, you're giving saddles back to the kids. If the saddles were going to Lion's Camp or to underprivileged kids or something like that, that's a little bit different. You're using it for your own organization, as I understand it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: See, I agree with that, except whenever we get -- that's the reason I brought up the scholarship thing. If they -- if they are giving -- plowing some of it back into the community to the youth, then that changes it for me. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 98 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It does. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And -- and a scholarship, to me, is one of the keys to this whole thing. I like to see these organizations that come through here that -- that are offering some cash to kids to further their higher education. Now, anything less than that, I -- I'd just as soon lock the doors and don't let anybody use anything. But -- but when you're actually helping a kid further his education and improving his life, you know, I think it's part of our duty to participate in that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I like the idea of the scholarship. What I'm concerned about is that that's something that these folks have added because they think that's something that would be -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, I agree. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- pleasing to us, and we don't know the criteria for it, how -- how an individual, a youth, would earn a scholarship, and what amount. And whether that would be for kids from Kerr County or whether it would be for kids from some other county. MS. HYATT: It would be for kids that participate. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yeah, that's what I suspected would be the case. MS. HYATT: It would be a graduating senior. JUDGE TINLEY: In essence, again, used within the 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 99 organization, benefiting individuals within the organization, either existing or former members. Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Why do you not use the outdoor arena more for that? MS. HYATT: Excuse me? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Why don't you use the outdoor arena more? MS. HYATT: Because -- we do. The 4-H does. But on your regular barrel races, you need an alley, and we do not have an alley. We suggested you open that up and make an alley, but there's nowhere, when you open it up underneath the announcer's stand, for them to run out. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Into the fence? MS. HYATT: Yes. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Into the road. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Well, you got -- you have to -- you have to cut through all the holding pens, which are not used for much any more anyway. They're just there. COMMISSIONER LETZ: What was the -- if we granted it, what's the reduction that they would receive? MS. GRINSTEAD: For the indoor arena, it would be $500 per day reduction. COMMISSIONER LETZ: And this is a two-day event? MS. HYATT: One day. COMMISSIONER LETZ: One-day event. 3-23-09 100 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. HYATT: And we would use that $500 for a scholarship. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And this is a -- a number 7, right? And what we've approved is -- COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Three. JUDGE TINLEY: Three. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Three. And why -- why is it we don't -- MS. HYATT: What's the difference in a 7 and a 3? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Let me ask that question. MS. HYATT: Okay, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What's the difference in a 3 and a 7? Why is it we didn't include 7's? SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: They were social organizations, I believe. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Social organization. Y'all need to drink more beer, I guess. MS. HYATT: We do not drink. It's -- it's family-oriented. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You see, in my mind -- and that's where I think that, you know, the scholarship thing brings them into -- whatever. And what I'm hearing Commissioner Williams say, you don't offer -- you haven't offered scholarships before today. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 101 MS. HYATT: No. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And you and I just visited before the meeting, and you decided, well, that's a -- that's a cool thing to do. To please us. Now, if you had -- if you had some kind of plan in place, you know, to provide us that -- you know, the criteria that you were going to use to award a scholarship. MS. HYATT: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And I can tell you what would make it a lot easier around here, if you'd say for Kerr County kids only. You know, if you had those kind of things I, put together, an actual plan, I -- you know, these guys would be a lot easier to get along with. MS. HYATT: Okay. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm -- that's just my observation. I'm not positive of that. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's a pretty astute observation. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER LETZ: The problem I have is that the scholarship goes to participants, essentially. If the scholarship was to go through, like, the 4-H program and let them disperse it or something like that, or give it to the Cailloux Foundation, y'all make a donation to the Cailloux Foundation, there's a lot of scholarship funds around that 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 102 goes to community-wide. You can represent, you know, obviously, agricultural type events. If you can find an ag group that -- you know, where it's going to, then it's going to the benefit of the community as a whole. MS. HYATT: Okay. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Are most of your young people engaged in the 4-H program? MS. HYATT: Yes, they are. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, then, that's a really good suggestion, to think about your dollars for a scholarship being administered by 4-H. If most of your kids are in the 4-H program, that's a good suggestion. MS. HYATT: Can we come back next Commissioners Court with some paperwork to show you? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. MS. GRINSTEAD: Can we approve this based on them coming back? 'Cause the first date is April 26th, I think. They've got two days pending this year, and so I really need to get -- I have no contract out to Diane because of this, so can we approve it so I can go forward, like, as far as waiving the fees? And then -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What if it's not approved? What if it's not approved in the final analysis? MS. HYATT: I just talked to Diane just a moment ago when I stepped out, and she's the president, and I asked 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 103 her about the scholarship that you and I talked about. She said that would be no problem at all. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, but the approval is up here. Diane's not going to be approving it; we are. JUDGE TINLEY: I think Diane probably -- the board of this organization needs to formally approve -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. JUDGE TINLEY: -- the program, as well as all the criteria. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Is that what you're talking about? I'm sorry. JUDGE TINLEY: And -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see. JUDGE TINLEY: -- until they formalize it on their end, I don't see how we can respond to it. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree with you, sir. MS. GRINSTEAD: Do I have permission to go forward as if everything is going to be approved? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't know that it's going to be approved. JUDGE TINLEY: I'd say go forward the opposite, unless and until it changes. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's the way I see it. Put the onus on them to make the change. MS. GRINSTEAD: Okay. 3-23-09 104 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. HYATT: Okay. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Next meeting is when? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: First meeting in April. COMMISSIONER LETZ: 8th? 9th? Or -- MS. GRINSTEAD: The 13th. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Jody, what is your time frame? What is your problem? MS. GRINSTEAD: Well, right now there's nothing in ', writing. We have nothing other than holding that date. Well, it takes time to get a contract, and they still have to pay a setup fee and other fees, but right now nothing's happening, so now we wait till the 13th. MS. HYATT: And our race is the 26th. MS. GRINSTEAD: I mean, it just doesn't give a whole lot of turn-around time to get contracts signed or deposits put in or -- and we've -- I mean, this has been going on, I think, eight weeks now. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: About two weeks -- almost two weeks. I mean, the meeting's on the 13th. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, like, if you want to try to get us in here -- MS. GRINSTEAD: No, forget it. I never said a thing. We'll just wait. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm going to happy hour, as soon as the preacher leaves the room. We can -- 3-23-09 105 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Donna, are these dates that you've had in the past? ', MS. HYATT: We -- last year, we ran three times II with y'all, and this year we have two dates. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You've already put out publicity on those dates? MS. HYATT: Yes, because at the time, we were under ', the impression that we were going, you know, to get the ~', facility for the amount. So, it's already been advertised. We have people coming -- big girls are coming, you know, the PRCA girls, even. We can't change. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I'd be willing to do this on a one-time approval for this particular event, and that if -- if you don't come forward with a plan that the Court agrees is acceptable for the ever-and-ever permission, but for a reduced rate, then it's a one-time only. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: That was a motion, wasn't it? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That was a motion to give them a reduced rate as a nonprofit for this one event only, until they have time to come forward with a plan. And -- JUDGE TINLEY: And we approve them on an ongoing, permanent basis, or -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Or we may not approve it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I have a question. Is 3-23-09 106 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 that -- is that okay by the County Attorney? 'Cause that's not the way this agenda item is styled. It is to grant approval -- or to add them to the list. MR. EMERSON: I don't know why they couldn't be added for one -- one event only. JUDGE TINLEY: On the basis of his motion, be treated as a nonprofit for the purpose of this one event. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: For this one event. MR. EMERSON: I think the agenda item will allow 10 for that. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. All right. JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second. Question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) MS. HYATT: Thank you very much. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you. Motion does carry. I think the burden is now on your organization to put something together to try and get some permanency. MS. HYATT: Okay. Thank you, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: Thank you, ma'am. Okay. It's now a bit past 11:30, so we can go to our 11:30 item, to consider, discuss, and take appropriate action to approve a 3-23-09 107 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 proclamation to declare May 7, 2009, National Day of Prayer; in addition, to declare National Day of Prayer on the first Thursday of every May and allow the Commissioners Court to sign a new proclamation on that day each year. Reverend Lancaster? MS. LANCASTER: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: You're running at us a little differently this time, aren't you? MS. LANCASTER: Yes. I figured after 12 years, we should do things a little bit different. No, what we would really like to do, since it has been 12 years now -- this will be the 13th year that we'll have this event here at the Kerr County Courthouse for people in Kerr County. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Do you have any scholarships? (Laughter.) MS. LANCASTER: No, we don't. But on the proclamation, it can remain the same, except for the fact that the scripture and the theme are changed every year. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, let me -- let me think out loud about that, Reverend. I may not be here five years down the road, and maybe none of us will be here five years down I the road. MS. LANCASTER: I may not either. JUDGE TINLEY: Well, that's true. I'm a little reluctant to bind future courts with something. It then puts 3-23-09 108 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 the burden on a future court, that because of some conflict in circumstances or dates, it then would put the burden on that court to come back and to -- you know, to come back to affirmatively modify or void or do away with a court order that we passed in perpetuity today. So, I -- I certainly see no problem with doing it this year, but I'd be reluctant to bind it on an ongoing basis. MS. LANCASTER: And that's fine. We can come every year and ask. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Please do. JUDGE TINLEY: It's good seeing you. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Please do. We enjoy you. MS. LANCASTER: So, that's -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: You can do your dinner on the grounds that day, and your entertainment too. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, I don't know that those would mix. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: I don't think they'd mix well. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: "Just a Closer Walk With i Thee" or something like that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're talking rock and roll 23 I bands. 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: I don't think Reverend Lancaster would want any rock and roll type music in conjunction with 3-23-09 109 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't think so either. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: For sure, no tub music. MS. LANCASTER: It would depend if Jesus was mentioned in it in the current way. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. MS. LANCASTER: But I think we've always had, you know, wonderful music and good participation, and there's been more participation each year. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: It's a great thing. MS. LANCASTER: So -- so, we can look forward to doing this, then, on Thursday, May the 7th, from 11:30 to 12:30? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes. JUDGE TINLEY: That was a motion? COMMISSIONER LETZ: Yes, that's a motion. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: We have a motion and a second. Question or discussion on the motion for the National Day of Prayer for this year, May 7, 2009? Further question or ii discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: You -- and you're asking each of us to participate in some way or another? MS. LANCASTER: Yes. What I had asked for is for Judge Tinley to read the proclamation for Kerr County, and 3-23-09 110 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 then all of you to sign that in front of the people. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Oh, yeah, mm-hmm. MS. LANCASTER: Because that makes an impact, and besides, it lets everybody know, you know, who you are, in case they don't, and I think that's very important. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's easy enough. COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's easy. JUDGE TINLEY: Any further question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Thank you, I ma'am. MS. LANCASTER: Thank y'all very much. JUDGE TINLEY: Appreciate you being here. MS. LANCASTER: Thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Let's go, if we might, to Section 4 of our agenda, payment of the bills. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we pay them. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded to pay the bills. Any question or discussion? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I do have a couple of 3-23-09 111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 questions, Judge. JUDGE TINLEY: All right, sir. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I've tried to go to the Auditor's office this morning and -- and discuss some of it, but I wanted to -- there's a couple of things I wanted to bring before y'all so we can all have the discussion. On Page 4, 198th District Attorney, and we're sending a check for $16,000 to Kimble County. Now, would you explain to us what that's about, please? MS. HARGIS: That's 1/12th of the budget that we approved for them at budget time, the 16,000. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That we -- that we do for Kimble County. Do we pay Kimble County? MS. HYATT: We pay Kimble County, and then Kimble County then sends the money back to the 198th D.A.'s office, because they are the -- they collect the funds from all the counties for that, for 198th, and then they disburse it back to the 198th. We are not their agent, like we are for the 216th. Kimble County is the 198th agent. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Bank account is in Kimble ~ County. MS. HARGIS: Yes. Yeah. And let me clarify that, that the 198th D.A.'s office handles their own bank account once they get the funds, but it does go through Kimble County for the -- for them to give their share, Mason and Menard's 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 112 I ~ share as well. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Do we make a check payable to Kimble County? MS. HARGIS: To Kimble County. And then Kimble County then sends it to the 198th, and we're not privy to how they do that. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Say that one more time, ~ please? MS. HARGIS: We're not privy to -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: To what? MS. HARGIS: How Kimble County handles the money once they receive it. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think that is the thrust of the questions I asked the District Attorney when he was here the other day, which prompted a visit from the District ~ Attorney later on. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And in our visit this morning, I ended up with a document in my hands, and I can't remember where it came from, or where it went, actually, but it talked about -- it had some of the -- some of his payments on there; i.e., a -- there was two people that I asked you, "Who are these people?" And they were assistant D.A.'s. MS. HARGIS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And do you -- I mean, it's probably none of our business, obviously, but can you tell me 3-23-09 113 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 who they are? MS. HARGIS: I didn't bring the invoice; I didn't know you were going to ask specifically. I think one of them was Walker, and then another -- two of the D.A.'s that were making $4,800 a month, and the invoice that we received from the 198th is actually for $28,000. We've always apparently received, I've been told, a larger invoice from -- from them than we actually send them. We send them what we budget. And every year when you approve their budget, we send them 1/12th, and they have always billed us more than that, but we always pay what we budget. And I don't know the background for that, but apparently it's been going on for several years. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. But, again, I'm sure it's none of my business; however, I find it very interesting. You know, and when I see that kind of stuff, my thought goes to the 216th, and I see the D.A. over there with a -- with an assistant D.A. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mm-hmm. COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And then I look at -- MS. HARGIS: He has two. He has two, Lucy and -- COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- 198th with two assistant D.A.'s, and I don't know. And I'm bringing this up because we're going to have to deal with this, possibly, pretty soon in our budget. So, you guys start getting in gear. Page 9. 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 114 This is Commissioner Letz' -- becoming Commissioner Letz' -- one of his favorite topics. And I thought I'd stir the pot just a little bit. Down at the bottom, County-Sponsored, the last one, the Historical Commission, conference expenses for Mr. Luther. You know, I know -- like, as an example, our Child Welfare Board that the County funds, that we -- we have specific things that we pay for. We don't -- we don't want to pay for things that the state is obligated to pay for. So, we pay for things -- in this case, we pay for -- if they pull a kid out of -- a baby out of the home late at night, we have -- we provide a box of diapers, as an example. And I'm wondering, the Historical Commission, we -- I think the State tells us that we need to set aside "X" amount of dollars to -- to run the Historical Commission. But I'm wondering, is one of those things traveling and taking trips and those kinds of things? Do y'all know? JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner, when we considered the budget allocation for the Kerr County Historical group, they presented us with a request that had various and sundry categories in it, and they had a bottom line, and we acted upon that and approved a total amount, as I recall. I think what we're doing is, by doing that, we're doing the bookkeeping and handling their disbursements, or reimbursements, as in this case. I don't know -- I don't recall there being any particular allocation of what we did 3-23-09 115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 approve, which was considerably less than what was requested, COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's correct. JUDGE TINLEY: About somewhere between a third and half of what they requested. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: About half. JUDGE TINLEY: We did not break it down as to the categories that they requested. We just approved a lump sum number. So, it occurs to me that -- that if -- if their organization is approving that expenditure, as long as it's still within the budget, that's where we are. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That's the only way they can get any funds at all, is to come through nondepartmental? JUDGE TINLEY: Well, no, they came through County-sponsored. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Or County-sponsored. JUDGE TINLEY: Yeah. They've got a -- they've got a -- COMMISSIONER OEHLER: That was my fault. JUDGE TINLEY: -- a total amount allocated through County-sponsored. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: And I don't know -- there's 3,500, 6,500, somewhere in there. But they draw against that, and we do the bookkeeping for them, is what it amounts to. 3-23-09 116 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can you see that? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Okay. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Not from me, no. Thank you very much, for the feeble explanation. JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Let me call the Court's attention to Page 8, under Adult Probation, the Lori Conger entry. I got a call from -- from a representative of Ms. Conger, and we had approved an amendment to that lease a few years ago. It, by the way, comes up for renewal again this coming October 1. But we had an incremental increase each year, and somehow we did not pick up the increase last October. It was budgeted. It was there. And so when I looked into it, the funds were approved as part of the budget, but we need to get that caught up. And they very quickly responded and we're making that situation right, and I just wanted you to be aware of it. Any other questions? Comments? Do we have a motion? THE CLERK: We have a motion and a second. JUDGE TINLEY: All right. 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.) 3-23-09 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 117 JUDGE TINLEY: The motion does carry. Do we have MS. HARGIS: No, sir, we do not. JUDGE TINLEY: Any late bills? MS. HYATT: No, sir. JUDGE TINLEY: I've been presented with monthly reports from Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4; District Clerk; Justice of the Peace, Precinct l; Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2; and Constable, Precinct 3. Do I hear a motion that these reports be approved as presented? COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. JUDGE TINLEY: Motion made and seconded for approval of the designated reports as presented. Question or discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, signify by raising your right hand. (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) JUDGE TINLEY: All opposed, same sign. (No response.) JUDGE TINLEY: That motion does carry. Do we have any reports from any of the Commissioners in connection with their liaison assignments? Commissioner Baldwin? COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, sir, thank you. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Commissioner Letz and I met 3-23-09 118 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 with the representative of Kendall County W.C. & I.D. Number 1, and began a discussion with respect to an interlocal agreement for treatment of wastewater that would come from Center Point to -- to Comfort. And it was a good meeting, and we -- what we tried do in that -- in that first meeting was identify to the extent possible some of the issues that we'd have to deal with in an interlocal agreement. My sense of the meeting -- and Jonathan can say whether he agrees or disagrees, but my sense of the agreement -- of the meeting was that they really are still very much in favor of -- of this project and are willing to move forward on it. So, when I got back, I asked the County Attorney to see if he had anything in his file that looked like a draft of an interlocal agreement for wastewater type services. In addition to the -- in addition to the wastewater services, treatment of effluent, also we want to examine the potential -- the potential for management and operations. Okay? And so these are things we talked about. Anything you want to add, Jonathan? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. It was a good meeting. I think they're very interested on the sewer side, and working with U.G.R.A. on the water side. JUDGE TINLEY: Anything else, Commissioner I Williams? COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No, sir. 3-23-09 119 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 JUDGE TINLEY: You got anything for us, 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Is that it? COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's it. JUDGE TINLEY: Commissioner Oehler? COMMISSIONER OEHLER: Not really anything. COMMISSIONER LETZ: Just an informative item. I'm not sure why I was asked, but I've been asked to go to the -- I think it's the state Environmental Defense Fund, participate in a forum. That's an organization that I'm normally not, you know, real close with. But, anyway, they've asked me to come and visit with them on a forum relating to some of their issues in the hill country. I'm talking with their -- one of their people, trying to decide whether it's something I want to do. I'm leaning towards doing it. It's on April 19th in Austin. And, I think that's it. Well, I guess there is one other thing. Commissioner Baldwin and I met with Little League representatives after our discussion we had last meeting, and we were going to -- I think we kind of got that kind of working a little bit better, but we will be working on bringing that lease with Little League back to the County sometime later this year, probably after their season's over with, and focus on -- and enter into a new agreement with them, iron out some of those issues. 3-23-09 120 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. At this time, I'm going to recess the Commissioners Court meeting to go into executive or closed session to consider the item identified as Item 21 on the agenda. It is now 11:49, and we will go out of public or open session to go into executive or closed session. (The open session was closed at 11:49 a.m., and an executive session was held, the transcript of which is contained in a separate document.) JUDGE TINLEY: Okay. Does any member of the Court have anything to offer -- we'll be back in open or public session. It is 11:57. Any member of the Court have anything to offer with respect to any matters considered in closed or executive session? I hear nothing, so any further matters to come before the Court this morning? We will be adjourned. (Commissioners Court adjourned at 11:59 a.m.) 3-23-09 121 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 STATE OF TEXAS ~ COUNTY OF KERR ~ The above and foregoing is a true and complete transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 27th day of March, 2009. JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk BY : ___ ~jl'~r~ _ __ _ Kathy Ba k, Deputy County Clerk Certified Shorthand Reporter 3-23-09 ORDER NO. 31240 KERB COUNTY JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY COPIER CONTRACT Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve the Kerr County Juvenile Detention Facility copier Contract with Ikon, subject to the County Attorney's review and approval of same. ORDER NO. 31241 ROAD & BRIDGE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL BIDS Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 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 recommendation of Road & Bridge Administrator and accept annual bids as follows: Culvert pipe is awarded to Contech Construction. 1-3/4" base material for our pick up in San Antonio is awarded to Martin Marietta @ 5.00/TN. 2-1/2" base material for our pick up in San Antonio is awarded to Martin Marietta Materials @ 4.75/TN. 1-3/4" base material to be delivered to Comfort is awarded to Reeh Quarry @ 9.40/TN. 2-1/2" base material to be delivered to Comfort is awarded to Allen Keller @ 11.30/TN. It needs to be noted that Kerr County retains the rights to add transportation charges to the unit price to determine the "low bid" for a particular job site. This may result in more than one supplier being "low bidder", depending on the locations of job sites. (This statement is found on the base material bid form.) Emulsion oils is awarded to Ergon Asphalts and Emulsions, Inc. Black base is awarded to Vulcan Construction Materials. Cold mix is awarded to Martin Marietta Materials. Paving aggregates is awarded to Martin Marietta Materials for grade 3, 4 and 5 trap rock. With all bid prices to begin April 1, 2009 and be in effect until April 1, 2010. ORDER NO. 31242 KERR COUNTY TREASURER'S MONTHLY REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 2009 Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Accept and approve the Kerr County Treasurer's Report for February, 2009, as presented. ORDER NO. 31243 PROCLAMATION FOR CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Adopt Proclamation declaring April, 2009, as Child Abuse Prevention and Awareness Month in Kerr County, and approve blue ribbons to be tied on the courthouse trees during the month of April. ORDER NO. 31244 FINAL REVISION OF PLAT FOR LOTS 2A-1 AND 2A-2 IN PECAN VALLEY NO.2 Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioners OehlerBaldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve final revision of Plat for Lots 2A-1 and 2A-2 in Pecan Valley No. 2 Subdivision located in Precinct 2. ORDER NO. 31245 NAME A PRIVATE ROAD PER 911 GUIDELINES Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 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 naming a private road as Old Spanish Trail West, located in Precinct 4. ORDER NO. 31246 SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR VISTAS ESCONDIDAS DE CYPRESS SPRINGS EATATES Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 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 on April 27, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. for Vistas Escondidas de Cypress Springs Estates, Lots 128 and 129. ORDER N0.31247 CONSTABLE PRECINCT 2 RACIAL PROFILING REPORT FOR 2008 Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 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 Constable Precinct 2 Racial Profiling Report for 2008. ORDER NO. 31248 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COPS (COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES) GRANT Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve applying for U.S. Department of Justice COPS (Community Oriented Policing Services) Grant. ORDER NO. 31249 OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS AMERICAN RECOVERY ACT OF 2009 Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 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 applying for the Office of Justice Programs American Recovery Act of 2009 in the amount of $12,689.00. ORDER NO. 31250 ELECTION EQUPMENT CONTRACT WITH CITY OF KERRVILLE Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve Election Equipment Contract with City of Kerrville for 2009 City of Kerrville election. ORDER NO. 31251 HEART OF THE HILLS BARREL RACING USE OF HILL COUNTRY YOUTH EXHIBIT CENTER Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 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 adding Heart of the Hills Barrel Racing to the Non-profit list for a reduced rate at the Hill Country Youth Exhibit Center (HCYEC) one time only. ORDER N0.31252 PROCLAMATION TO DECLARE MAY 7, 2009 A NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve a Proclamation to declare May 7, 2009, a National Day of Prayer. ORDER NO. 31253 CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, came to be considered by the Court various Commissioners Precincts, which said Claims and Accounts are: Accounts Expense 10-General $ 295,977.31 14-Fire Protection $ 15,000.00 15-Road & Bridge $ 27,213.93 16-2008 Capital Projects $ 6,139.53 19-Public Library $ 33,333.33 23-Juvenile State Aid Fund $ 17,451.71 26-JP Technology $ 2,118.75 27-Juv Intensive Prog-State $ 5,460.00 37-Center Point Wastewater $ 3,719.00 50-Indigent Health Care $ 21,172.64 76-Juv Detention Facility $ 8,649.67 83-216th District Attorney $ 1,507.01 86-216th CSCD $ 401.55 TOTAL $ 43 8,144.43 Upon motion made by Commissioner Baldwin, seconded by Commissioner Letz, the Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to pay the claims and accounts. ORDER NO. 31254 MONTHLY REPORTS Came to be heard this the 23rd day of March, 2009, with a motion made by Commissioner Letz, seconded by Commissioner Williams, the Court unanimously approved by a vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve the Monthly Reports from: JP #4 District Clerk JP # 1 JP #2 Constable Pct #3