1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT 9 Regular Session 10 Monday, May 13, 2002 11 9:00 a.m. 12 Commissioners' Courtroom 13 Kerr County Courthouse 14 Kerrville, Texas 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judge H. A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1 24 WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2 JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3 25 LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 4 2 1 I N D E X May 13, 2002 2 PAGE --- Visitor's input 3 3 --- Commissioners comments 4 4 1.1 Pay Bills 8 1.2 Budget Amendments 9 5 1.3 Late Bills 18 1.4 Read and Approve Minutes 22 6 1.5 Approve and Accept Monthly Reports 23 7 2.1 Adoption of proclamation declaring May 2002 as Mental Health Awareness Month 24 8 2.2 Status of Sheriff's Department radio project, approval of remaining leases 30 9 2.3 Authorize Sheriff's Department to apply for Tobacco Compliance Grant 36 10 2.4 Reallocation of leftover Sheriff's Department Capital Outlay funds to purchase computer for 11 Personnel Office 37 2.5 Consider final plat/Development plan for Cedar 12 Ridge Mobile Home Park 45 2.6 Consider preliminary plat for Hidden Hills 48 13 2.7 Consider preliminary revision of plat for Hidden Hills 49 14 2.8 Consider final plat of Cutoff Business Park with variances for lot size, drainage, utilities 15 installation and driveway intervals 52 2.9 PUBLIC HEARING - abandonment of Pier 5 Drive 56 16 2.10 Consider changing status of Pier 5 Drive in Pier 5 Subdivision from public to private 60 17 2.11 Approve road name changes for privately-maintained roads in Pct. 2 in accordance with 911 guidelines 63 18 2.12 Consider request by Pipeline Group to reduce fees for use of the Ag Barn to last year's cost 63 19 2.13 Consider bids received and award construction contract for 2002 TCDP Colonia Fund wastewater 20 project, Phase I, in Kerrville South 67 2.14 Consider amending Kerrville South construction 21 fund budget to provide not more than $6,200 for attorney fees to develop documents 69 22 2.15 Consider authorizing Grantworks to submit 2001 TCDA Colonia Comprehensive Plan to the Office of 23 Rural Community Affairs for their review 70 2.16 PUBLIC HEARING - Kerr County Subdivision Rules 89 24 2.17 Consider restructuring Courts Collections Dept., promote Brad Alford to Chief Collections Officer 106 25 --- Adjourned 126 3 1 On Monday, May 13, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., a regular meeting 2 of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in the 3 Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse, Kerrville, 4 Texas, and the following proceedings were had in open court: 5 P R O C E E D I N G S 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Good morning, everyone. It's 7 9 o'clock in the morning on Monday, May the 13th, Year 2002. 8 We'll call to order this regular term -- regular meeting of 9 the Kerr County Commissioners Court. Commissioner Griffin, 10 I think you have the honors this morning. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes, Judge. If you 12 will please rise and join me for a moment of silent prayer, 13 followed by the pledge of allegiance. 14 (Prayer and pledge of allegiance.) 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, any citizen 17 wishing to address the Court on an item not listed on the 18 regular agenda may come forth and do so. Is there any 19 citizen who'd like to address the Court on an item not 20 listed on the regular agenda? 21 MR. NOLEN: I have a petition I'd like to 22 submit to the Court. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes, Mr. Nolen. If 25 you would identify yourself, and then, while -- 5-13-02 4 1 MR. NOLEN: I'm Robert Nolen from Mountain 2 Home. I live in Scenic Acres. I've been out there for 25 3 years, and I'm submitting a petition this morning for the 4 consideration of the Court to stop hunting in Scenic Acres 5 Subdivision. I do not know the powers of the Court, but we 6 have lawyers that can handle that. And the petition says 7 high-powered rifles; that is not big enough for low-powered 8 rifles, hopefully. Anyway, I hope the Court will consider 9 it and get to me later. Thank you much. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Nolen. We 11 will take your petition and refer it to the Kerr County 12 Attorney's office for his advice and counsel on this issue. 13 Anyone else wishing to address the Court on an item not 14 listed on the regular agenda? Going once, going twice. Is 15 there any other citizen who'd like to address the Court on 16 an item not listed on the regular agenda? Seeing none, 17 we'll turn to the Commissioners' comments. We'll start with 18 Commissioner Griffin. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. I just wanted to 20 report that I spoke with Bill Tucker at the Highway 21 Department last week, on Friday, as a matter of fact, and 22 the signs have been ordered for the names of the crossings 23 the on the North and South Fork. We should see those start 24 to pop up sometime in the next few -- few weeks. They won't 25 all come at once, so depending on what order they get them, 5-13-02 5 1 they'll start sticking them up as soon as they get them, and 2 glad to see that happen. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Exciting. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Baldwin? 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have no comments 6 this morning, Judge. The only comment I would like to make 7 is, I hope Commissioner Letz will report on Tivy baseball. 8 I just don't have -- I can't remember what happened. I know 9 they're still going, is all I know. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: They won. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Williams? 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I cleared my e-mail 14 out this morning, and it was chock-full. One item of 15 interest that's not on the agenda has to do with the 16 County's application to the Texas Capital Fund on behalf of 17 the Frontier Gear. It appears that they were scored three 18 out of 14 applications, so it appears that that application 19 will be funded. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do you want to give us a 21 report on former Commissioner Lackey? 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And on Butch Lackey, 23 our Precinct 2 Commissioner predecessor, when last I spoke 24 to those who knew or had heard from members of the family, 25 the Commissioner is resting well in Methodist Hospital in 5-13-02 6 1 San Antonio, having been flown there with a severe heart 2 attack, one blocked artery, and subsequent testing revealed 3 seven ulcers. And one of his friends said that was one for 4 each of his children and one for his wife. And -- but he's 5 resting well, and hopefully on the road to recovery. That's 6 Butch Lackey we're talking about. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Letz? 8 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Tivy baseball report. 9 They're very dominating in the playoffs so far this year. 10 They beat Uvalde two games straight, two out of three 11 series, and they did the same to Dripping Springs, won the 12 first two games. The first one was real close, 13 one-to-nothing. Second game was a bit of a blowout; the 14 final score was 14-4, I believe. But, they're -- they're 15 doing very well, and they are playing this week again. I'm 16 not sure if it's going to be in San Marcos or Medina Valley, 17 whoever won that series on Saturday night; I'm not sure what 18 the outcome was. But, they're peaking again. They had a 19 little bit of a fast start, kind of a lull mid-season, like 20 they seem to have frequently, then they start peaking again 21 right at the right time. Hopefully, they will go on for 22 quite a while still. 23 Couple of other items. The City of 24 Kerrville's long-range comprehensive plan, that final Town 25 Hall Forum will be Tuesday, May 21st, at 6 o'clock at the 5-13-02 7 1 Notre Dame Social Center. A lot of people put a lot of time 2 into that long-range plan, and I think it will be worthwhile 3 for people who have an interest certainly to attend that and 4 get an idea as to where the City of Kerrville thinks the 5 city's going in the next 20 years. 6 Also, a couple of comments regarding water 7 planning and Region J. Not going to take a lot of time, but 8 we're in the -- I guess just starting up our second planning 9 phase. The scopes of work are in Austin for -- or have been 10 completed by the regions and are pending approval by the 11 Water Development Board right now. I think a lot of people 12 were under the impression that once we got the plan done, 13 our work was kind of finished, and it really just means that 14 we just start over again. It's a 5-year, ongoing process. 15 Governor Perry is very much behind the process, assuming 16 he's our next governor, or I guess re-elected as governor. 17 I think he's certainly very committed. I'm not sure 18 Mr. Sanchez' position on the regional -- but Governor Perry 19 is certainly behind it, wants to continue funding it, as 20 does the Legislature. 21 Kerr County has a couple of items in our -- 22 that we'll be working on in the next couple of weeks. One 23 we're currently working with Headwaters on is locating some 24 new monitoring wells; they got some funds in from Peterson 25 Foundation to get drilled. We're also looking at a study on 5-13-02 8 1 spring flow, exactly trying to monitor and do some spring 2 flow evaluations up on the western part of the county, and 3 try to look at what pumping and various aquifers will do to 4 the spring flow, as well as what cedar and brush control 5 does to that spring flow. So, it's a pretty comprehensive 6 spring flow analysis in western Kerr County, and also 7 northern Bandera County. Another project, they're going to 8 do some more extensive work on the Lower Trinity and 9 updating the Middle Trinity model, which has a lot of 10 deficiencies, in most people's opinion. So, anyway, we're 11 working on a lot of science in those two areas, working 12 closely with Headwaters and some other groups in that area. 13 That's all I have. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, good. I would remind 15 everyone that our next meeting will be Tuesday, May 28th, 16 because of the Memorial Day holiday on Monday, May 27th. 17 Also, that is our regular scheduled evening meeting, so the 18 next meeting will be at 6:30 in the evening on Tuesday, May 19 the 28th, so mark your calendars accordingly. With that, 20 let's get into the approval agenda and pay some bills. 21 Mindy, do we have some bills to pay today? 22 MS. WILLIAMS: Oh, we got a bunch to pay. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone have any questions or 24 comments regarding the bills as presented by the Auditor? 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a 5-13-02 9 1 comment -- not a comment, a correction on Page 1, under 2 Commissioners Court. The second and third item, exact same 3 thing, but different numbers on them. And -- and the 4 correct number should be 39.95 for both of them. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You've got gold leaf 6 on yours? 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I didn't go into that; 8 I didn't read any names. 39.95 is the correct number. Thea 9 called the printing company and got that, I think. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 11 comments regarding the bills? 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Move we pay the bills. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 15 Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 16 authorize payment of the bills as corrected and recommended 17 by the Auditor. Any other questions or comments? If not, 18 all in favor, raise your right hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Budget 23 amendments. Budget Amendment Number 1 is for Commissioners 24 Court. 25 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. What we have is a 5-13-02 10 1 couple of bills, and they are basically deductibles. We 2 haven't met our deductibles on these particular cases yet. 3 We do not have the money in the budget in this particular 4 line item at this time, and I don't believe there is 5 anyplace in the budget that we can find to move the money 6 from. Mr. Tomlinson might be able to find that. I wasn't 7 able to. I'm not sure where he's got areas. The only other 8 option we would have would be to declare an emergency and 9 move the money out of the surplus fund. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This is for our 11 professional services for legal? 12 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: For what? 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Legal matters, right? 14 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, right. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And it's where we have 16 ongoing suits and -- 17 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- we haven't met the 19 deductible for the insurance minimum? 20 MS. WILLIAMS: Correct, mm-hmm. On the first 21 two bills, the one from Continental Casualty and the one 22 from Columbia Casualty, we do have a $6,000 deductible on 23 each of those, and these are the first bills that we have 24 gotten on each of these suits, and they fall under that 25 $6,000 deductible. 5-13-02 11 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the nature of the 2 lawsuits, Mindy? 3 MS. WILLIAMS: Pardon? 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you know the nature of 5 those lawsuits? 6 MS. WILLIAMS: Regarding the Kerr County 7 Sheriff's Department. It's an inmate. One of the loss 8 dates was from March of '99. The other one was from June of 9 '98. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I guess the question 11 is, how do we want to do it? What are the options? We can 12 either -- 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, we need to identify a 14 source for the funds. 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Both of those -- just 16 for your information, those were two very old lawsuits. And 17 I know that one -- 18 MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah, they were both -- 19 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah, both those 20 lawsuits have been thrown out of court. But you still have 21 to meet the deductible. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What you're saying is, 23 prior to you? 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Oh, yeah. Y'all will 25 get mine later, don't worry about it. 5-13-02 12 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Our contingency is about 2 out, too, as I recall. 3 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, it's pretty well 4 tapped. 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Do we have a 6 professional services line item anywhere else that -- 7 MS. WILLIAMS: No, sir, I don't believe so. 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's -- I'm sure 9 that's what you looked for. 10 MS. WILLIAMS: Right, yeah. I'd be glad, if 11 the Court would like, to set this one aside for the time 12 being. I'll be glad to go back to the office later and go 13 through the budget and see if I can find these funds 14 anywhere else. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Look closely at the 16 Sheriff's Department budget. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Now, wait a minute. 18 MS. WILLIAMS: I'm not so sure there's 19 surplus there, either. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I don't think there's 21 much surplus anywhere. 22 MS. WILLIAMS: I'll be glad to go back and 23 check, if we want to just set this one aside for the time 24 being. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Only place I'm aware of any 5-13-02 13 1 surplus is the County Attorney's office, because the third 2 position in the County Attorney's office was unfilled for 3 about three months -- 4 MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- of the budget year. 6 MS. WILLIAMS: I can go back and look there. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's a possible source of 8 some funds. I attempted to use the money to hire 9 Mr. Pollard to work on the tower leases, and you guys didn't 10 like that, so -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We like it now. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- you might take a look at 13 that. 14 MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: And see. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: At least see what's 17 there, because that's an item that we're not going to spend 18 it. I mean, it's -- 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah. Mr. Bonner wasn't 20 hired until February or January, something like that, and so 21 there's -- 22 MS. WILLIAMS: So probably three or four 23 months surplus, okay. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yeah, in the salary line 25 item. 5-13-02 14 1 MS. WILLIAMS: I'll go back and look at that 2 one. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. We'll set that one 4 aside for the time being. Budget Amendment Number 2 is for 5 the District Courts. 6 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. We have a court 7 transcript that we need to pay for out of the 216th District 8 Court. And, again, they are out of money in their line 9 item, but Mr. Tomlinson asked that we move it out of the 10 198th District Court transcript line item. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Third. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 15 second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court approve 16 Budget Amendment Request Number 2. Any further questions or 17 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 18 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 20 (No response.) 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 3 is 22 for the County Treasurer's office. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. The County 24 Treasurer asked that we do a budget amendment to move money 25 to her Part-Time Salary line item. She has someone working 5-13-02 15 1 there until the chief treasurer's position comes available, 2 I guess, the 1st of June, and she's running short of funds 3 in that area, so she'd like to move it out of her Deputies 4 line item to Part-Time. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: So moved. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 8 second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court approve 9 Budget Amendment Request Number 3. Any questions or 10 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 11 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 13 (No response.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Amendment 15 Number 4 relates to County Court at Law. 16 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. We have an order to 17 pay a court-appointed attorney. And, again, they have 18 expended the moneys that was in the budget for the 19 Court-Appointed Attorneys line item. They do have some 20 surplus under Special County Court at Law Judge, and they'd 21 like to reclassify $4,000 of that into their Court-Appointed 22 Attorneys line item. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 5-13-02 16 1 Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve 2 Budget Amendment Request Number 4 for the County Court at 3 Law. Any other questions or comments? If not, all in 4 favor, raise your right hand. 5 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 7 (No response.) 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Number 5 9 again relates to the District Courts. 10 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. Again, we've got 11 some court-appointed attorney timesheets that we need to 12 pay, and we also have some court-appointed services. I 13 believe one is probably an investigator, and one was expert 14 fees involved in one of the cases. We were able to find 15 moneys in the 216th and 198th courts to move around 16 correspondingly, and they would like to go ahead and move 17 the moneys for the court-appointed services in the 216th out 18 of their Special Trials in the amount of $304.43. And in 19 the 198th, they'd like to move the $1,250 from Special 20 Trials to their Court-Appointed Services in that budget. 21 And Mr. Tomlinson would like to move money out of the 198th 22 District Court Court-Appointed Attorneys line item to the 23 216th Court-Appointed Attorneys line item in order to pay 24 these orders that we have pending at the present time. 25 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved. 5-13-02 17 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 3 Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 4 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 5 for the District 5 Courts. Any questions or comments? If not, all in favor, 6 raise your right hand. 7 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 9 (No response.) 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Do we have 11 any late bills, Mindy? 12 MS. WILLIAMS: I have one late bill. I also 13 have one additional budget amendment that came in late. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you, Mindy. 15 MS. WILLIAMS: You're welcome. This is 16 Commissioner Baldwin's little deal. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Budget Amendment Number 6 is 18 for the Commissioners Court. 19 MS. WILLIAMS: Would you like to explain this 20 one, sir? 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Sure. 22 MS. WILLIAMS: Okay. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: As you know, we fund 24 the First Responders, and for some reason, they have gone 25 over budget. And in order for us to cover that, I have gone 5-13-02 18 1 into my personal conference line, so -- I'm through going to 2 school. Whether I get certified or not, that's beside the 3 point, but we've gone into my conference line to pick up 4 that $28.02. Aren't I a nice guy? 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. I'll 7 second that motion. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 9 Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 10 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 6. Any other 11 questions or comments? 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: What do you mean, I 13 was late? 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: If not, all in favor, raise 15 your right hand. 16 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 18 (No response.) 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 20 MS. WILLIAMS: We didn't get it in time to 21 make copies, let's put that it way. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Late bills. 23 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, we have one late bill. 24 I'm sorry I don't have copies for you, but what it is, it's 25 a reimbursement to Judge Henneke for his seminar expenses 5-13-02 19 1 when he attended the Probate Judges' seminar in Galveston. 2 It's in the amount of $546.50. It's going to come out of 3 Line Item 10-426-486, and there are ample funds in there to 4 cover this expenditure. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move for approval. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 8 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve 9 a late bill in the amount of $546.50 payable to the County 10 Judge for reimbursement of expenses in attending the Probate 11 Judges' conference. Any questions or comments? If not, all 12 in favor, raise your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I have a 18 question of the Auditor. 19 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes? 20 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mindy, don't take my 21 comments or questions as being picking on you, 'cause I 22 didn't know you were going to be here this morning; I 23 thought Tommy was going to be here. But I've had telephone 24 calls, and I think you've confirmed there have been visits 25 to your office regarding the recent auction of County 5-13-02 20 1 surplus materials -- 2 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 3 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- and supplies, 4 equipment and whatever. And, from what I understand, there 5 was a dump truck on the approved list that was put to 6 auction, and the auction went forward on the dump truck and 7 the bid was accepted. There was no reserve bid, I believe. 8 MS. WILLIAMS: Not that I know of. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Pardon? 10 MS. WILLIAMS: Not that I know of. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: No reserve, so 12 whatever was bid was the high bid. The bid was accepted. 13 The person making the bid was advised that he had 14 received -- he had won the bid, and was instructed on what 15 to do -- 16 MS. WILLIAMS: That's what I understood, yes. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- to close the deal, 18 and came to the Auditor's office with the proper funds and 19 so forth, I believe is correct, and was told that the truck 20 -- dump truck was removed from the list. 21 MS. WILLIAMS: Actually went -- no, sir. 22 When he came to the office, it was after he had been 23 notified that the dump truck should not have been on that 24 surplus property sale list. It was an error. It was never 25 supposed to be on there. It got on there by mistake; it did 5-13-02 21 1 not get taken off in time. And he was notified that -- that 2 the truck was not to be sold. He came to our office after 3 that time, and, in fact, I believe it was later that 4 afternoon. 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, I stand 6 corrected in that regard. I guess the question is, I'm not 7 sure what the law says about this, if an item is left on -- 8 a bid -- a bid is -- bid is taken and accepted, and then 9 later the item is pulled, is that -- for lack of a better 10 word, is that kosher? 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, that's an issue. The 12 other issue is that this discussion -- this item was not 13 posted on this agenda, so it's something that we will have 14 to -- 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We can't take action 16 on it. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- take a look at, come back 18 to at a later date. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. We'll 20 dispose of it at a later date, then. I think we need to 21 know. The people, in good faith, had made the bid, and the 22 bid was accepted. 23 MS. WILLIAMS: I'll check on the funding for 24 Budget Amendment Number 1 and give it to you later. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, thank you. 5-13-02 22 1 MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, I would 3 entertain a motion to waive reading and approve the minutes 4 of the Wednesday -- Monday, April 22nd meeting of the Kerr 5 County Commissioners Court, and the Monday, April 8th 6 meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I have a 8 correction for the Monday, April 22nd. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: In those minutes, I 11 had -- in the opening remarks, I was talking about cedar 12 eradication and the program going on in San Antonio, and I 13 meant to say G.B.R.A., and it landed in our minutes as 14 U.G.R.A., and I'd like to change the "U.G.R.A." to 15 "G.B.R.A." 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any objection? 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Without objection, that 19 correction is noted. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, then, I would 22 entertain a motion to waive reading and approve the minutes 23 of those two meetings as corrected. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So moved. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 5-13-02 23 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 3 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court waive 4 reading and approve the minutes of the meeting of April 8th, 5 2002, and April, 22nd 2002, as corrected. Any questions or 6 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 7 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 9 (No response.) 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 11 time, I would also entertain a motion to approve and accept 12 the monthly reports as presented. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 16 Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 17 approve and accept the monthly reports as presented. Any 18 questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 19 right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. All right. 24 We'll turn immediately to the consideration agenda, then. 25 The first item for consideration is consider and discuss 5-13-02 24 1 adoption of the proclamation declaring Mental Health Month 2 in Kerr County for the month of May, the year 2002, and also 3 presentation by Dr. Sam Junkin on behalf of Hill Country 4 M.H.M.R. Dr. Junkin, welcome. 5 DR. JUNKIN: Thank you. Judge, 6 Commissioners, it's been a privilege now for several years 7 to be your representative to the board of the Hill Country 8 Mental Health/Mental Retardation Center. Just very quick 9 background to lead to this resolution that we ask you to 10 consider today. The Hill Country Mental Health/Mental 11 Retardation Center is made up of ten mental health clinics, 12 eight mental retardation centers, six early childhood 13 intervention centers serving 19 counties across this part of 14 Texas. Within Kerr County, Hill Country offers mental 15 health services at the Kerr County Mental Health Clinic, 16 mental retardation services at the Kerrville Special -- Kerr 17 County, pardon me, Special Opportunity Center, and early 18 childhood intervention services. You would be interested in 19 knowing that when we were organized, actually administration 20 was split between Kerr County and Hays County, San Marcos. 21 All services -- administrative services are now being 22 consolidated to Kerr County. 23 During the past year, Kerr County mental 24 health clinics served 1,101 individuals suffering from 25 mental illness in our county or our immediate area. Of 5-13-02 25 1 these, 155 were under the age of 18, which tells you 2 something about our population. Kerr County's Special 3 Opportunity Center served 132 individuals who have mental 4 retardation, and the early childhood intervention program 5 served 83 individuals under the age of 3 who are at high 6 risk for having developmental delays. In total, the Hill 7 Country served more than 1,300 individuals in Kerr County 8 facilities alone during this past year. At the present 9 time, we are doing some renovation that is necessary, and 10 most of our services will soon be fit in the former Ultrafit 11 building over on the other side of the river. 12 The total Hill Country Community Mental 13 Health/Mental Retardation Center has a budget of some 14 $24 million. There are more than 500 employees in this 15 19-county area. In Kerr County, there are more than 96 16 employees with a salary base of approximately 2 and a half 17 million dollars, so there is quite an impact for these 18 services in Kerr County alone. In February, the Hill 19 Country expanded services by entering a contract with the 20 Texas Council on Offenders With Mental Impairment for the 21 delivery of services, coordination to juvenile offenders who 22 are suffering from mental illness and have been placed under 23 some form of community supervision. The program is designed 24 to help these juvenile offenders learn how to manage their 25 mental illness and positively to impact recidivism. 5-13-02 26 1 On June 1st, the Hill Country will expand 2 services by entering a contract with the Texas Commission on 3 Alcohol and Drug Abuse to deliver substance abuse services 4 in Kerr County. Initial services will include the operation 5 of a detoxification center for adults and residential 6 facility for male adolescents. Again, it is hard for us to 7 acknowledge, but these are truly devastating problems that 8 we face, and this new service will have a positive impact on 9 that. Throughout our services, we strive to help consumers 10 learn the skills and connect with the local resources that 11 will assist them in coping with their mental condition and 12 help each consumer become as independent and as productive a 13 possible citizen in -- in our area. We've come a long way 14 in the last five years. Some of you know of this history 15 and have kept up with it well. 16 Recently, our center was featured as a case 17 study in the National Journal of Disabilities for a 18 consumer-driven and individualized approach we designed and 19 implemented in the delivery of supported employment 20 services. We also are featured in a chapter of a book 21 entitled How to Deliver Accountable Care. This chapter 22 discusses the implementation of management and data analysis 23 strategies we use in the Hill Country, and the resulting 24 improved quality, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of 25 services to local consumers. And recently, Linda Parker, 5-13-02 27 1 our chief executive officer, whose official title is 2 Executive Director, was featured as a presenter in a 3 national symposium, National Behavioral Health Care 4 Conference, which was held in Chicago at the end of March. 5 Again, her presentation focused on the utilization of 6 management strategies and data analysis for the delivery of 7 high quality, cost-efficient services. 8 It is fair for me to defer at this point to 9 Linda Parker. She has given us almost unbelievable 10 leadership as we have sought to become much more 11 cost-effective in the way we deliver services, always to 12 focus on the good of those who are being served, those in 13 our population whom we recognize to be some of the most 14 at-risk and the least able to help themselves. We come to 15 you today -- Mrs. Parker is here with me. We come to you 16 today to present you a resolution to be considered. 17 Nationally, this is Mental Health Month. Now, actually, you 18 will remember that we serve not only mental health, but 19 mental retardation and early childhood services, so mental 20 health is only one part of it. But, nationally, this is 21 Mental Health Month, and we ask you to consider this 22 resolution. Judge, I'd be happy to read it, if you wish. I 23 think you have copies, but if you wish, I will read it for 24 you quickly, or if you just wish to consider it as it is 25 presented. 5-13-02 28 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: All the Commissioners have 2 copies of the proclamation. I believe we can just go ahead 3 and consider it. Does anyone have any questions for Dr. 4 Junkin or Ms. Parker? 5 DR. JUNKIN: Come stand up here with me, hold 6 me up. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Welcome, Linda. 8 MS. PARKER: Thank you. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: At this time, I'd entertain a 10 motion to approve the proclamation naming the month of May 11 as Mental Health Month in Kerr County. 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So moved. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 15 Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court adopt a 16 proclamation naming the month of May as Mental Health Month 17 in Kerr County. Any other questions or comments? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I have a comment I'd 19 like to make. I remember seven or eight years ago when we 20 were getting this ball rolling out in the community, they -- 21 they made a promise that they would put forth great efforts 22 to serve the alcohol and drug abuse folks, and you're 23 finally getting to it, and I appreciate that so much. 24 That's the biggest problem we have in our country today, 25 and -- and, really, my point is -- is that you've kept your 5-13-02 29 1 word, and I appreciate that very much. 2 MS. PARKER: Thank you. 3 DR. JUNKIN: We're excited about this new 4 adventure, although we must always remind ourselves that 5 mental health/mental retardation are the two central foci. 6 And this -- this new initiative with alcohol and drug abuse 7 must not detract from those others, but can add to it. And 8 what we find is that so many of our clients are 9 dual-diagnosed -- is that the right word? They not only 10 have mental impairment or some sort of mental difficulty, 11 but also have drug and alcohol abuse, and so we'll be 12 working at it directly. We have an official copy of the 13 proclamation, Judge. I'd just give it to you. 14 MS. PARKER: I would like to thank the 15 Commissioners Court for giving us Dr. Junkin. He's been a 16 true leader and a great supporter, and also someone that 17 listens when there are a lot of problems and I need a 18 shoulder to lean on. So, thank you very much for appointing 19 him. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: You're welcome. Any other 21 questions or comments? We probably need to officially adopt 22 the proclamation. All in favor, raise your right hand. 23 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign. 25 (No response.) 5-13-02 30 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 2 MS. PARKER: Thank you. 3 DR. JUNKIN: Thank you. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you very much. Next 5 item for consideration is Item Number 2, consider and 6 discuss status of Sheriff's Department radio project and the 7 approval of the remaining leases. Sheriff Hierholzer. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think you helped put 9 this one on the agenda this time. I'll start out by saying 10 two of the leases have already been signed, and that's the 11 two with L.C.R.A. that were signed a few months ago. But 12 these last two leases have involved a little bit more, as 13 the Judge knows, and Tom Pollard helped on it, and I think 14 one of the other sides intend to get Scott Stehling to work 15 on it, and just -- there's just been pretty good involvement 16 in trying to get these done. And it is imperative that we 17 get them done quickly, and as I found out last week from 18 Dailey Wells, they said that at the end of this month, if we 19 do not have them done by the end of May, that the 20 infrastructure costs on this system is going up 15 percent. 21 So, it is something that we need to get finished and get 22 rolling. I mean, we've been working on them since last 23 October, when the whole system was approved, and it's 24 just -- it -- I think the Judge may agree with me that it's 25 been more of getting all the attorneys together and finally 5-13-02 31 1 having us sit down. And you've got the lease with the phone 2 company and then you've got a sub-lease with the landowner, 3 and the same thing out west. And I think the Judge told me 4 the other day that you do now have the -- the leases in 5 place, and he knows what the costs are. I haven't read them 6 yet. And see if we can get this approved and get the ball 7 rolling. This was our final hurdle of getting Dailey Wells 8 to actually start the implementation of the system. 9 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What constitutes 10 infrastructure costs that would be subject to 15 percent 11 increase? 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Fifteen. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I said 15. 14 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I don't know. Okay? 15 That's just what they notified me. They just called and 16 said the infrastructure costs would be going up 15 percent 17 just due to everything. You know, not just us; it's just 18 that cost on it. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone have any questions? 20 Basically, what we're doing here is we're leasing space on 21 two radio towers owned by Five Star Cellular, one out west 22 and one in Center Point. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: And I think we're going to 25 pay $2,000 a year to Five Star Cellular for each of those 5-13-02 32 1 towers -- tower sites. On the west, as additional 2 consideration, they've asked us to build a caliche road and 3 a fence for access to the site. In the east, the underlying 4 landowner has asked for a $2,500 signing bonus and $250 a 5 month additional rent. 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The only additional 7 equipment we had to use is, the one out west, under the 8 original considerations, we were hoping to be able to use 9 the same building out there that the phone company uses, but 10 after the meeting with the phone company, what they do is 11 those are prefab buildings, and if they decide they don't 12 need their building at one site, they just go in with a 13 crane, lift up the whole building and move to it a different 14 site. And if they were to have allowed to us put our 15 equipment inside that building, it would have tied down that 16 building forever on that site if they ever wanted to move 17 it, so they wouldn't allow to us do that. So, you had a 18 building on that one. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Are these amounts within 20 the -- I guess, the amount that we had in the project bid? 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: The only -- well, these 22 amounts were not included in the -- in the bid, because 23 these are separate from what Dailey Wells is doing. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Now, we will have to pay for 5-13-02 33 1 the additional building out west. We'd have to find the 2 money for that somewhere. Originally, the -- the lease 3 payments for the two tower leases was going to be $4,500 a 4 month, but since we have to put the building out west, Scott 5 Parker and his company backed off of that one $500 a month, 6 so it's down to $4,000 a month for the leases for the actual 7 use of the towers, and it's going to be an additional $3,000 8 for rent for the use of the eastern land. So, it's going to 9 cost us a little more -- the annual cost is going to be 10 $7,000, as opposed to $4,500, so we went up $2,500. We will 11 point out that we're using the L.C.R.A. towers at no cost. 12 For three years? 13 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Three years, I believe 14 is what's in those leases. The only thing, the building 15 itself, just to give you an idea, they've got to put a 16 building also on the east end, but that's in the bid pack, 17 'cause that site never had a building. And Dailey Wells' 18 bid cost on that building, I think, was $6,000. It's not 19 that -- you're not talking a $20,000 building or anything. 20 It's just a concrete sealed building with its own 21 electricity and heating and cooling system to keep all the 22 equipment operating. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where's the's tower? 24 Where is that located? 25 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Just about across from 5-13-02 34 1 Starlite out there. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's a smaller tower. 4 The four towers that will end up being used are that one 5 across from Starlite, the one phone company tower out west 6 off Highway 41, the large tower -- L.C.R.A. tower off 7 Cypress Creek Road at Red Rose Ranch, and then the other 8 L.C.R.A. tower, which is the one we're currently using, the 9 only tower we currently have, which is off of Upper Turtle 10 Creek Road. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: My only question is 12 this one sentence in here, I just want to make sure we're 13 all saying the same thing. Kerr County to construct road 14 and fences. Does that mean that we will contract someone to 15 go in and build a road? Or will County-owned trucks and 16 tractors go in and build roads? 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think the contemplation is 18 we'll see if we can get Road and Bridge to do it. And this 19 is legal, because we have a lease and an easement into the 20 tower. We're not constructing a private road for someone's 21 individual benefit. This is for our use in maintaining the 22 tower site, and also construction. 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The part on that is, 24 that entrance where that tower is is currently the main 25 entrance to that ranch, and you have to wind around and get 5-13-02 35 1 down to where the tower site is, and the tower site's 2 actually fenced off. If you go straight from Highway 41 3 through a corner of their property, it's about a 100-yard 4 road right there. All -- and it's already fenced on one 5 side, which is the corner of the property, and it just has 6 to be fenced up the other side, so you're talking about -- 7 estimate about 100 yards of high fence, and all they wanted 8 was just caliche put down in between, just so you could get 9 in and out of there. And then they're going to refabricate 10 the chain link fence around the tower itself, to move the 11 gate getting into the chain link part from where it is 12 currently to that site. We're not doing that. 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This -- this extra 14 $250 per month to the landowner goes -- goes on so long as 15 we're on the tower? 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Right. 17 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or the lease. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Move we approve the two 19 remaining leases that are before us today. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner Letz, 22 second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court approve the 23 leases and license agreements for the remaining two towers 24 and authorize County Judge to sign same. Any questions or 25 comments? 5-13-02 36 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Last comment. Some of 2 y'all may wonder why we hadn't used or didn't opt to use the 3 tower on the Hall ranch out there. There were some 4 unforeseen costs once Dailey Wells came up and studied it, 5 and Trott Communications also looked at that. That tower 6 has to be brought back up into compliance, which is either 7 repainting that -- stripping and repainting that 8 300-some-foot tower, or putting the lighting -- the new 9 lighting system on it that's required by F.C.C., and the 10 lighting system itself would be $15,000. I think it would 11 probably be at least as much, and it was -- they wanted to 12 deed the tower itself over to the County, but the property 13 and the building still remained on ownership with the Halls, 14 and we're also going to get a lease -- a rental -- monthly 15 rental fee on it. And Trott also told me that most 16 towers -- they said there's some exceptions; some of them up 17 around New York are still there after 70 and 80 years, but 18 the tower life of most towers themselves is about 45 years. 19 That tower on the Hall site was constructed in 1968, and it 20 was more of a cable TV tower than a microwave-type tower. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: We have a motion and second 22 on the floor. Any other questions? If not, all in favor, 23 raise your right hand. 24 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 5-13-02 37 1 (No response.) 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. All right. 3 Next item, Item Number 3, consider and discuss authorizing 4 the Sheriff's Department to apply for a Tobacco Compliance 5 Grant through Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts to 6 purchase LCD data projector, laptop computer, and digital 7 camera. 8 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I think y'all got most 9 of the backup that goes along with this. You know that our 10 department is very aggressive in -- progressive in applying 11 for grants to come up with things. Since we have S.R.O. 12 officers and D.A.R.E. officers in each of the schools -- in 13 your backup, up it says that there's one officer that will 14 go to D.A.R.E. school this summer. He graduates this week, 15 and so he will be our third D.A.R.E. officer, which is also 16 down at Center Point. And each of those officers, they -- 17 they'll be teaching D.A.R.E. classes, and the one at Tivy 18 also teaches a law enforcement class in that school. This 19 grant idea was brought to us by one of the superintendents 20 in the school that recommended we try and do it, and what it 21 is, is -- is just for updated equipment, being -- being the 22 LCD projector and laptop computer hooked to it so that they 23 can teach those lesson plans, and especially the -- the 24 tobacco and alcohol plans in a little bit more vivid method 25 to all the kids in the school districts than just standing 5-13-02 38 1 up at a podium and handing out brochures and things like 2 that. So, I don't know whether we'll receive this grant or 3 not, but I agreed that it was an excellent idea to apply for 4 it to upgrade those technologies. So, I'm asking y'all to 5 apply. There's no matching funds or anything else. It's 6 just a grant we'll get. 7 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I move we approve the 8 Kerr County Sheriff's Department applying for the Tobacco 9 Compliance Grant for the -- from the Comptroller of Public 10 Accounts. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 14 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Williams, that the Court 15 authorize the Kerr County Sheriff's Department to apply for 16 Texas Compliance Grant from the Texas Comptroller of Public 17 Accounts. Any other questions or comments? If not, all in 18 favor raise your right hand. 19 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 21 (No response.) 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 23 4, consider and discuss reallocation of leftover funds in 24 the Capital Outlay in order to purchase a computer for 25 Personnel Office. 5-13-02 39 1 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: What this is, is this 2 year alone -- of course, the Sheriff's Office has been out 3 there since '70 -- I mean '96. A lot of our computers are 4 going down. A lot of the computers that we had were from 5 the old county system from back when we were over here, and 6 then the former Sheriff switched over to that LEM system for 7 a while, and we are having several computers with serious 8 problems. Several of them are just totally out. We had 9 seized three computers right before I took office, which had 10 been awarded to us. We have already put those computers to 11 use, even though some of them are a number of years old. 12 They're used in our booking area. Still, we had to kind of 13 rob Peter to pay Paul. We took one of the computers out of 14 our officers' squadroom to put into the Personnel Office at 15 this time. I have even -- I replaced a home computer that I 16 had at my house, and I donated the one I did have to our 17 office, so that it's also being used. We don't need fancy, 18 high-dollar computers. We just need computers that will tie 19 into this Ableterm system. 20 What I'm asking, we had some unexpended funds 21 of over 2,000 -- or $2,092 in Capital Outlay we did not use 22 because we got a little bit cheaper break on some things 23 when we actually bought them. But all I'm asking is that we 24 be able to go to Walmart or wherever and buy one computer 25 that will be compatible with our system, and I would 5-13-02 40 1 definitely expect it to be way below $1,000 to -- to put 2 into that Personnel Office. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: This -- you said -- 4 or told me earlier that this is a replacement for a computer 5 that went down? 6 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: The one in the squadroom 7 we changed over into this. We've had several go down that I 8 haven't ever come, and so we've been just kind of 9 relocating. So, yes, if you get around to it, it is, 10 because the one in the -- in the Personnel Office we had to 11 move to another location to replace one that went down in 12 there. So, it's -- it is, Jonathan, it's a replacement. 13 We're not adding more computers to our system. We've lost 14 several, and next year we're going to have to seriously look 15 at -- look at some computer problems. We're trying to go 16 more and more computerized so that we get away from this 17 paperwork that we have in all these file cabinets. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only thing -- I mean, I 19 -- you've convinced me to go along with this, even though I 20 wasn't keen on it early on, but you mentioned going to 21 Walmart. I know you were just saying Walmart; I think you 22 really -- 23 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: I meant that. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- you need to get with 25 Shaun. And I -- 5-13-02 41 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I was going to say the 2 same thing. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we need to 4 make -- I mean, buying the cheapest isn't always best when 5 it comes to computers. We need to get computers that will 6 work with our system, and he can build them, I believe. 7 Didn't he build one recently? 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Very, very clever, and 10 probably much better. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Beauty of working it 12 through Shaun -- and I'm totally in favor of the request, 13 but the beauty of working it through Shaun is that you will 14 insure compatibility with the Ableterm system, and you'll be 15 able to make sure that he knows what's there, so that if 16 there is maintenance required, I would -- 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Right. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- highly recommend 19 that you do that. 20 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, Shaun knows that. 21 He works -- he's got one of our computers right now that was 22 down, that I hope to get back pretty quick, because he's had 23 it over a week now. But we're still doing that, and we do 24 work with him, and he understands. He's been out there a 25 lot in the last few weeks. 5-13-02 42 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You may be able to end 2 up with a lot more computer for the same money. 3 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: It's just the ones they 4 had gone to before when they were replacing computers, in my 5 opinion, they were spending two to three times what you need 6 to spend on a computer. I just want to get away from some 7 of that. So -- 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Rusty, did I hear you 9 say the reason you have money left over in your Capital 10 Outlay is because of smart shopping throughout the year? Or 11 why do you -- 12 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yes. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: -- why do you suddenly 14 have some money left over? 15 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, some of it was 16 when we equipped the cars, you know, we got into the Capital 17 Outlay with the car equipment and the new cars. We used 18 some old equipment. We also got better prices on some of 19 the newer equipment, and then Tommy realigned some of this 20 stuff after the budget to where some of the equipment 21 maintenance came out of different line items and in 22 different areas than I thought it was originally going to 23 come out of, okay? And, in doing his realignment, it's 24 dropped some of my line items a little bit lower than what 25 I'd like to see, but it left some in other places, too. 5-13-02 43 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay, thank you. Not 2 that I like what I just heard, but that's good. You've 3 obviously been -- you're a smart shopper, saving the County 4 money. I appreciate that. 5 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Well, like I said, we do 6 -- we try and do a lot using seized computers. I've used 7 one from my house. I mean, just trying to do that, but we 8 are at a point in those computers that we've had out there, 9 that we're going to -- I'm going to have to seriously look 10 at replacing quite a few computers in the upcoming budget 11 year. Then I'll probably come back, 'cause there's some 12 other things with seven years out there now. I had three 13 cameras go out last week in the jail, and there's no funds. 14 So, next budget -- 15 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We'd better vote; it's 16 getting bad. 17 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Yeah. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have a motion? 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes, I'll make the 20 motion that we approve the reallocation of Capital Outlay 21 funds to purchase a computer and computer equipment for the 22 Personnel Office in the Sheriff's Department, with the 23 proviso that that be coordinated through Shaun, to -- 24 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Sure. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- to make sure we're 5-13-02 44 1 getting the best bang for the buck. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 4 Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 5 authorize reallocation of leftover funds in the Capital 6 Outlay budget for the Sheriff's Department in order to 7 purchase a computer and computer-related equipment for the 8 Personnel Office in the Sheriff's Department. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, usually we 10 actually put an actual number in the -- when we're 11 transferring, we actually put an actual number. Are we 12 saying here that we're transferring the remainder of the 13 Capital Outlay funds, everything over? 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: This is actually not a 15 transfer. It's just adding a computer to the approved list 16 of -- 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We don't have to come 18 back as a budget amendment, right? 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: No, because he's got the 20 money in his budget. Just do the line item. 21 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: All we're going to do is 22 whatever the computer costs. It won't be that -- 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I see what you're 24 saying. You're just adding the computer to the -- to the 25 Capital Outlay line. 5-13-02 45 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. Any other questions or 2 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 3 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 5 (No response.) 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 7 SHERIFF HIERHOLZER: Thank you. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Sheriff. Item 9 Number 5, consider and approve the final development plan 10 for Cedar Ridge Mobile Home Park, Precinct 1. Franklin? 11 Commissioner Baldwin, I guess. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Franklin. You were 13 right the first time. 14 MR. JOHNSTON: Actually, when this was put on 15 the agenda last Tuesday, I was out of town. The owner came 16 in and requested it. Subsequently, I inspected the site, 17 and it's not ready for my approval yet. I think we'll pass 18 on this till such time. 19 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. And I'm glad 20 you're doing that; it would save me to do it. I'm having a 21 hard time understanding why -- why we do it this way right 22 here, and I guess we need to sit down and have a visit about 23 it. But if, in your letter to Mr. Barney here, you're 24 telling him that the detention and drainage structure needs 25 to be constructed, the roads -- something needs to happen to 5-13-02 46 1 the roads, something needs to happen to the signs, U.G.R.A., 2 Headwaters, and the 911 and telephone, on and on and on and 3 on, I would rather see all that done before it even comes in 4 here. I mean, you're coming in here with a letter that's 5 saying you need to go do these things. Pick up a phone and 6 tell him to go do those things, and then I'll take it to 7 Commissioners Court. 8 MR. JOHNSTON: Like I said, there's a 9 misunderstanding, 'cause I wasn't here to really put it on 10 the agenda. He came in and it was -- 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 12 MR. JOHNSTON: -- it was put on. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll let that go, 14 then. I'm not going to let it go next time. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I agree with Commissioner 16 Baldwin's point. We need to look, 'cause we have not -- is 17 this the first? The first that we've dealt with development 18 plans, and in visiting Headwaters, they had some confusion 19 with it as well. We need to look at that and figure out -- 20 maybe get a different routing slip or something when it 21 comes to these development plans, because these are not 22 plats. They come to us one time for one approval, and -- 23 and, Franklin, I'm not even to the fee structure; I'm not 24 sure there's even authority for the fee structure. I'm not 25 thinking of looking at that, but anyway, these are -- it's 5-13-02 47 1 different than a subdivision plat. 2 MR. JOHNSTON: It is different. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And a different part of 4 the Code that we get our authority to do it, so it's a -- we 5 probably need to work through a, you know, format. 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I think there's a -- 7 and a broader issue is -- is that I would personally like to 8 see these -- anything, subdivision plats or whatever, not 9 come to the court until you are ready to recommend approval. 10 Or that there is an issue that cannot be resolved between 11 you and the developer or whatever, and that you need to 12 bring that to the court for resolution, and that that would 13 be the only two times we would see anything, preliminary or 14 final, but that it not come to Court until you're satisfied 15 that all of the -- 16 MR. JOHNSTON: And it wouldn't have -- 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- your matters have 18 been met and you're ready to recommend approval. Because 19 it's sometimes a little confusing to me when you -- we have 20 it on the agenda, you get to the podium, and I'm wondering, 21 is Franklin in favor of it or is he not? And I would just 22 like to have it where, when it comes to the -- when it's on 23 the agenda, either you have said that -- you have told us -- 24 MR. JOHNSTON: Right. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- implied to us that 5-13-02 48 1 it's ready for your approval, or that I can't handle this, 2 and you guys are going to have to do it. 3 MR. JOHNSTON: Right. 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's the only two 5 times I'd like to see them. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Before we go to the next 7 agenda item, though, on a larger issue, there was a lot of 8 talk not too long ago about the Court being opposed to 9 manufactured homes, and that we adopted the State's 10 manufactured home infrastructure requirements because we 11 didn't like manufactured homes and we wanted to stop growth 12 in the county, and I'm glad to see that we have the first 13 one that's worked its way to us. It's just a process. It's 14 not a bias, it's a process. It's a process designed to 15 protect the people who live in manufactured home rental 16 communities, so I'm glad to see that the lie has been put to 17 that allegation and that we have the first one that's 18 actually made its way to us. Okay. Let's move on to Item 19 Number 6, consider the preliminary plat for Hidden Hills Two 20 in Precinct 2. Commissioner Williams. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Mr. Johnston. 22 MR. JOHNSTON: This one goes with the next 23 agenda item. In fact, it may be easier to do 7 first. This 24 one depends on a road that's being considered in Number 7. 25 We can do this one and then kind of consider them both at 5-13-02 49 1 the same time. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Well, let's go ahead 3 and call up Item Number 7 simultaneously, which is consider 4 the preliminary revision of plat for Hidden Hills, Precinct 5 2. Explain them both together. 6 MR. JOHNSTON: Right. Item 7 extends a 7 road -- a private road called Hidden Hills Ranch Road, as 8 indicated on the plat. I don't have a total length on it; 9 it's half a mile or so, with a cul-de-sac in the existing 10 Lot 11. And Lot 11 is broken up into three lots, being 11 25 acres, 30 acres, and 92 acres, and it's served by this 12 road addition. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: So, we're being asked to 14 approve the preliminary plat and then to approve a revision 15 to the preliminary plat; is that correct? 16 MR. JOHNSTON: There is a revision to the 17 existing subdivision, Hidden Hills. The next one is 18 actually property adjacent to it. That would be -- 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: I see. 20 MR. JOHNSTON: -- incorporated into Hidden 21 Hills. I think that's the procedure. And the adjacent 22 property will be -- have access off this road that we're 23 approving now. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Does anyone have any 25 questions regarding these two? 5-13-02 50 1 MR. JOHNSTON: Don Voelkel used the wrong 2 terminology here; he used "replat" instead of "plat 3 revision". That will be taken care of. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What is the proper 5 terminology? 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Revision of plat. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Revision of plat. 8 That's what it says on Number 7, revision of plat. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Does anyone have any 10 questions? If not, let's -- 11 MR. JOHNSTON: It's called a plat revision. 12 I guess we'll have to set a public hearing for the final 13 plat for the rest of it. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Let's go, first of all, with 15 Item Number 6, consider the preliminary plat for Hidden 16 Hills Two in Precinct 2. Do we have a motion to approve the 17 preliminary plat for Hidden Hills Two in Precinct 2? 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So moved, Judge. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 22 Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 23 approve the preliminary plat for Hidden Hills Two in 24 Precinct 2. Any questions or comments? If not, all in 25 favor, raise your right hand. 5-13-02 51 1 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Item Number 7 is consider the 5 preliminary revision of plat for Hidden Hills in Precinct 2. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Does this -- this 7 doesn't require a public hearing, does it? It does? 8 MR. JOHNSTON: It's a plat revision, yes, 9 sir. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. What date are 11 we looking at here? Notifications have to go out, so we're 12 looking about the first meeting in June? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second, I think. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Second meeting in 15 June. The date of that would be? 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: 24th. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think that's right. 18 MS. SOVIL: 24th. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 24th. I would move 20 consideration of the preliminary revision of plat for Hidden 21 Hills Subdivision in Precinct 2 and set a public hearing for 22 same for the Commissioners Court meeting on June 24th, at 23 10 a.m. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 5-13-02 52 1 Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court 2 approve the preliminary revision of plat for Hidden Hills 3 Subdivision in Precinct 2 and set a public hearing for same 4 for 10 o'clock a.m. on Monday, June 24th, Year 2002, here in 5 the Kerr County Commissioners Court. 6 MR. JOHNSTON: Might also want to add that 7 the -- all the owners in Hidden Hills have -- have amended 8 their covenants and restrictions so that the people in 9 Hidden Hills Two, since that's an addition to the 10 subdivision, can use this road as access. 11 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 12 MR. JOHNSTON: That's on file. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 14 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 15 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 17 (No response.) 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Let's see if 19 we can't go ahead and get Item Number 8 in before we have 20 the public hearing. Consider the final plat of Cutoff 21 Business Park with the following variances: Lot size, 22 drainage, utilities installation, driveway intervals, 23 Precinct 4. Commissioner Griffin. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yes. And the Court 25 will remember that this is one that we had -- we've had 5-13-02 53 1 several times on the agenda, but the last time, I think 2 there were two or three issues that needed to still be 3 addressed, and I assume those have been -- 4 MR. JOHNSTON: I think the maintenance Letter 5 of Credit was not present that last time. I think that has 6 now been presented. I think a copy is in your agenda. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And then we had agreed 8 to the variances and that sort of thing, but had not taken a 9 vote. 10 MR. JOHNSTON: Everyone on the mylar has 11 agreed -- has signed off except the -- the City of Ingram. 12 It's been through their City Council, and they have a little 13 memo they sent out that -- that they've approved it subject 14 to the Commissioners Court approving it and approving the 15 agenda -- the variances. So, it's a chicken-egg deal going 16 on here. Is the mayor of Ingram here? The mayor was 17 supposed to come today to sign it. I guess we can approve 18 it subject to their signing it. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: What did get resolved on the 20 drainage issue? 21 MR. JOHNSTON: We had a letter from the 22 engineer that designed it, said it was installed or is 23 designed. I think that settles that question. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: It was installed or designed, 25 but does it -- the issue of the runoff -- 5-13-02 54 1 MR. JOHNSTON: Well, it runs into a public 2 waterway, Nichols Creek, and then it runs into the river. 3 And his study indicated it wouldn't really raise the 4 floodplain in that area or actually change -- 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That was -- the 6 critical issue on that was that it would not raise the 7 floodplain in the area when we signed off on that. 8 MR. JOHNSTON: Our rules say the actual 9 runoff through a subdivision should -- should be decreased 10 due to water impoundment. This one did have that, but it 11 didn't really increase it; it just kind of went through. 12 That's what the variance is all about, 'cause to really meet 13 our rules, it would have had to reduce to it 80 percent of 14 the -- from the pre-construction to the post-construction. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Which I never quite 16 understood. 17 MR. JOHNSTON: That's what the variance is 18 about. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: So, I would move that 20 we approve the final plat of Cutoff Business Park with the 21 four variances that we had discussed earlier, and authorize 22 the County Judge to sign same. 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second, with a comment. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 25 Griffin, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court approve 5-13-02 55 1 the final plat of Cutoff Business Park in Precinct 4 with a 2 variance as to lot size, drainage, the location of 3 utilities, and the spacing for the commercial driveways. 4 Commissioner? 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My comment is, our 6 Subdivision Rules really don't contemplate commercial 7 developments in the county, and the revision we're looking 8 at, we talked about modifying that a little bit, and we'll 9 bring that up at the public hearing. So, while we're 10 granting the variances here, I think after we do the 11 subdivision review, it will kind of explain why -- or why we 12 did that, because these need to be looked at on a 13 case-by-case analysis. Using the rest of our subdivision 14 rules as a guide doesn't make sense, because there are 15 different types of developments, so I think these various 16 issues will be addressed in the modification of the 17 subdivision rules and discussed at the public hearing. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 19 comments? 20 MR. JOHNSTON: Do you want to add anything 21 about signing -- or have the Judge sign it after the mayor 22 signs it, City Council -- 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Our procedure is that I'm the 24 last signature, so we've approved it. Once he -- once he 25 signs it, then I'll sign it. So, any other questions or 5-13-02 56 1 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 2 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 4 (No response.) 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. At this 6 time, we will recess the Kerr County Commissioners Court 7 meeting and conduct a public hearing concerning the 8 abandonment of Pier 5 Drive in Precinct 4. 9 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 10:04 a.m., and a public hearing 10 was held in open court, as follows:) 11 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Public notice of this hearing 13 has been given three times in the past three weeks, pursuant 14 to an application of the owners of property for the 15 abandonment of Pier 5 Drive South in Kerr County. Anyone 16 wishing to address the Court on the issue of the abandonment 17 of Pier 5 Drive in Precinct 4 may come forward and do so at 18 this time. 19 MR. TERRELL: Morning. My name's Tom 20 Terrell. I represent Mr. and Mrs. Wardroup and Mr. and 21 Ms. Mertl. And this is Mr. Simpson here? 22 MR. SIMPSON: Yes, sir. 23 MR. TERRELL: All right. I think we can cut 24 this short, gentlemen, by announcing that the parties are in 25 agreement. Is that correct? 5-13-02 57 1 MR. SIMPSON: Yes, sir. 2 MR. TERRELL: And that, generally, the 3 agreement is the parties have gone out on the ground, have 4 marked a place right here -- is this right? 5 MR. MERTL: Where the road turns -- 6 MR. TERRELL: Right here. 7 MR. MERTL: Yeah, that's it. 8 MR. SIMPSON: At the end of his fence there, 9 right. 10 MR. TERRELL: Everybody agree on that point? 11 Okay. Anyway, they have agreed that -- this is the Mertl 12 property -- that a line can be drawn from this corner of the 13 Mertl property eastward across the road. Mr. Simpson owns 14 all this in here, and that this portion north of this 15 line -- that would be -- that way can be discontinued and 16 abandoned, but that the application as regards the lines 17 south of that Cade Loop would be denied, and its existence 18 as a dedicated public road would continue in effect for that 19 south portion. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If my memory serves 21 me, that's what the good Commissioner from Precinct 4 22 suggested to happen. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, and actually, 24 I'm going to compliment all of the people -- 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: If you don't take the 5-13-02 58 1 credit, I am. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, I'll take the 3 credit. But the people involved got together and -- and 4 they came up with a workable solution, and that's the way it 5 ought to work. And I applaud -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I agree. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- everybody 8 concerned. And I think that -- that what we'll have to do 9 is, when we come out of the public hearing, is we're going 10 to have to probably come up with a way to get this legally 11 defined. But, I appreciate everybody's effort on it. 12 MR. TERRELL: In this connection, in fact, I 13 have drafted a document called a Roadway Deed and Agreement, 14 which is only an agreement between the parties. I've also 15 done a little rough draft and order to Commissioners Court, 16 which I guess I should give to Mr. Motley here. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We may want to defer 18 that -- Judge, you may. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: We're in a public hearing 20 now. We need to -- 21 MR. TERRELL: All right. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is there anyone else who'd 23 like to address the Court on the issue? Mr. Simpson? 24 MR. SIMPSON: I just wanted to clarify that 25 this would not affect our ability to be able to -- as it is, 5-13-02 59 1 that's an entire subdivision that we've bought. It's 2 subdivided into 12 lots. And, in case we did want to still 3 sell a lot, that abandoning that public road is not going to 4 reduce our ability to do so, is it? 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: No, it stays -- stays 6 as a private road. 7 MR. SIMPSON: So it's just going to be a 8 private road; we'll still be able to sell a lot if we need 9 to, so people have an easement down to it. That's my only 10 question. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else who'd like to 12 make any comments during this public hearing regarding the 13 issue of the abandonment of Pier 5 Road? 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have a comment on 15 Mr. Simpson's point, though, and Mr. Terrell may want to 16 respond. In the agreement that -- whatever you draft to 17 abandon it, it needs to stay a road. You don't want to 18 abandon it to the point that there's not a road there any 19 more. If you're considering at some point -- if you 20 eliminate that access completely and then you need to give a 21 right-of-way to someone, that right-of-way's going to 22 trigger having to replat that subdivision. 23 MR. SIMPSON: I don't want to have to do 24 that. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You need to make sure 5-13-02 60 1 that you're -- maybe through agreement. I'm not sure that 2 you're -- you know, the abandonment language, be very 3 careful that there's some sort of a right-of-way or 4 something there still. 5 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Not vacate the -- 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're not vacating. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Not vacating it. It's 8 abandoning. 9 MR. TERRELL: The problem -- I agree, we need 10 some language where he reserves it as a private road. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: By definition, it will be a 12 private road if we abandon it as a public road. 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other comments during the 15 public hearing? If not, we will close the public hearing 16 and reconvene the regular scheduled meeting of the Kerr 17 County Commissioners Court. 18 (The public hearing was concluded at 10:10 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court 19 meeting was reopened.) 20 - - - - - - - - - - 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: The next item for 22 consideration is Item Number 10, which is to consider 23 changing the status of Pier 5 Drive from public to private. 24 Commissioner Griffin. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. And this is 5-13-02 61 1 where I think we probably need to get the help of the County 2 Attorney, perhaps, because we are either -- as I understand 3 the statute, we're either shortening the road or we're 4 abandoning a portion, and I think it may be able -- we may 5 be able to do that either way, but I think we probably need 6 to make sure we have the language right for that order. And 7 perhaps what Mr. Terrell has written would be a good 8 starting point, but I would like to get the County 9 Attorney's review of that to make sure we're doing it in 10 accordance -- 11 MR. MOTLEY: The idea is that they're just 12 going to abandon the maintenance of the road? The County's 13 going to abandon maintenance? 14 MR. MERTL: You don't maintain it. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's not a 16 county-maintained road. What we're going to do is abandon 17 it as a public right-of-way, as according -- according to 18 the agreement that was reached. We've abandoned the public 19 right-of-way, but we are not vacating it as a road. We 20 still maintain -- I just want to make sure we get that right 21 in the language of the order. And -- 22 MR. JOHNSTON: Might need a survey to get a 23 legal description of what part we're talking about. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Exactly. So there may 25 be more to this than meets the eye, is all I'm saying, and I 5-13-02 62 1 think we need to make sure -- we just need to defer this to 2 perhaps the next meeting to act on that order, to -- to make 3 sure that everything is correct. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, either that, or we go 5 ahead and -- and -- 6 MR. MOTLEY: I thought it was just right at 7 the property line, what they were talking about, putting a 8 gate further north, and then south of that point, leaving it 9 as-is. 10 MR. TERRELL: We have a defined corner of the 11 Mertl property, then just go east. I don't think we need 12 the expense of a survey. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Well, I think everyone 14 understands where we are. When we have the proper 15 documentation, we'll bring it back to court for the official 16 order changing the status of Pier 5 Drive from the agreed 17 upon point north into the Simpsons' property from public to 18 private, but continuing it as a road. Okay? 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And, David, I'll get 20 with you with some of the other backup that you may not 21 have. 22 MR. MOTLEY: Okay. 23 MR. TERRELL: Well, will that be at the next 24 regular meeting? 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll shoot for that, yes, 5-13-02 63 1 sir. 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You bet. 3 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. Next item is Item 4 Number 11, consider and approve road name changes for 5 privately maintained roads in Precinct 2. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, these are 7 names submitted and obviously approved by the landowners, 8 property owners. They're private. They comply with the 911 9 guidelines, and I would move their adoption. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 12 Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 13 approve road name changes for privately maintained roads in 14 Precinct 2. For the record, the existing road name of 15 Reagan Lane East is being changed to Kindred Trail East. 16 That's in the Elm Pass II subdivision. And the unnamed road 17 3012 East is being changed to Purple Star Drive East. Any 18 questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 19 right hand. 20 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 22 (No response.) 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Item Number 24 12, consider and discuss request by the Pipeline Group to 25 reduce the current charges for use of the Ag Barn at last 5-13-02 64 1 year's cost. Commissioner Baldwin. 2 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir. As you see 3 in the note in the -- in the packet, I'd received a phone 4 call from the Pipeline Group that has been coming into Kerr 5 County for a number of years and putting on classes that I 6 understand some of our local volunteer fire departments go 7 to, and I understand that some of the Road and Bridge -- 8 Kerr County Road and Bridge Department goes to, and it's 9 safety courses on things that are underground, underground 10 facilities. And they come in and they teach all of those 11 classes free of charge, and also provide a meal for all 12 those that attend. And -- and we're all invited, as well. 13 But their request is -- and I'm sorry, I don't know what 14 the -- what the price is for this year, but last -- last 15 year, their request is that -- that we go back to last 16 year's prices, which was a $172 rental fee out there. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only comment is -- is 18 from a -- to make it easier, to me, we ought to either waive 19 all the fees, or they go to the 25 percent or 75 percent 20 reduction. I mean, trying to set different fees for 21 everyone, to me, is -- 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Well, that's fine. I 23 don't think that that's a big deal. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: But, I mean, if it's 25 serving county fire departments, volunteer fire departments 5-13-02 65 1 and our County staff, I think we should waive all the fees. 2 I don't think we should charge anything, really. I mean, 3 but I think I am opposed to having a -- different than our 4 scheduled fee. I think we can adjust the category they go 5 into, but I don't think we should create a new structure 6 just for one entity. 7 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm -- I'm sure that 9 that would be fine for them. I think that was just their 10 first thought, is let's go back to what -- you know, we're 11 willing to pay what we did last year. I don't know that, 12 but -- 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What does it take to 14 get into the 75 percent? 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 75 percent may give 16 them a break -- may give them a better deal. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It would just be a 18 nonprofit, but not Kerr County. Kerr County is free, but 19 nonprofits use it at 75 percent reduction. Isn't that 20 right, Bill? 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is Pipeline Group a 22 nonprofit? 23 COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's not a nonprofit. To 24 me, it's more in the category of county use, personally. 25 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Franklin, does your 5-13-02 66 1 organization use -- go to this function? 2 MR. JOHNSTON: They do. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Uh-huh. And some 4 volunteer fire departments, I don't know who else. Those 5 are just two entities. 6 MR. JOHNSTON: They prevent people who do 7 underground -- do excavation from digging the pipes or phone 8 lines or that type of thing. 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: City telephone 10 company, all those. Letz needs to go to it. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, it -- I agree, 12 it's a good cause and we probably need to take a hard look 13 at that. If it's -- if it's benefitting our employees and 14 volunteer fire departments, et cetera, perhaps we should -- 15 they should be in the category of having the fee waived. 16 Does that make sense? 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: It does to me. Let's 18 try that in the form of a court order and see what happens. 19 (Laughter.) 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I move that we waive 21 the fee for this group. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second that 23 motion. 24 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 25 Griffin, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 5-13-02 67 1 waive the fee for the use by the Pipeline Group of the Hill 2 Country Youth Exhibition Center for a safety program 3 regarding underground facilities to be held on August 6, 4 Year 2002. Any other questions or comments? If not, all in 5 favor, raise your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Gentlemen, at this time I'm 12 going to suggest we take our break. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm with you. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: And reconvene at 10:35. 15 (Recess taken from 10:20 a.m. to 10:35 a.m.) 16 - - - - - - - - - - 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll reconvene this regular 18 session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. The next 19 item for consideration is Item Number 13, which is consider 20 and discuss bids received and award a construction contract 21 for the 2002 T.C.D.P. Wastewater Project, Phase I, in 22 Kerrville South. Commissioner Williams. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, in your 24 absence on Thursday, we had a commission -- special 25 Commissioners Court meeting at which we accepted the bids 5-13-02 68 1 that were submitted for the Kerrville South sanitary sewer 2 project, T.C.D.P. Contract 721075, which would be for the 3 construction of Riverhill sanitary sewer bypass and the 4 Rolling Green lift station abandonment. I have 5 correspondence here from Tetra Tech, Inc., engineer on this 6 project, and they are recommending -- let me read it into 7 the record, the three -- the three bids. Compton 8 Enterprises bids a total of $301,355, which is a base bid of 9 $221,675, and additive alternative number 1 of $79,680. 10 D.W. Contractors bids on the base $191,140, and on the 11 additive, $110,470. And M.B. Bender Company bids on the 12 base $260,113.5, and on the additive, $154,160. The 13 engineer on the project recommends that the low bidder, 14 Compton Enterprises, L.L.C., with a base bid of $221,675 and 15 an alternate additive of $79,608, for a total bid of 16 $301,355, be -- that the bid be awarded to Compton 17 Enterprises in the total amount of $301,355, and I so move. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Second. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 20 Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 21 award the bid for the Kerrville South sanitary sewer 22 project, T.C.D.P. Contract 721075, Riverhill sanitary sewer 23 bypass and Rolling Green lift station abandonment, to 24 Compton Enterprises for a total bid of $301,355. 25 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Comment. Just -- 5-13-02 69 1 Commissioner Williams reading all those numbers, I don't 2 know if everyone is aware how close those bids were. 3 Compton's won that -- won their bid by $255. And $255 on 4 300 -- over $300,000 bid is a pretty close bid. Pretty 5 competitive. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You bet it is. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any questions or comments? 8 If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 9 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 11 (No response.) 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item, 13 Item Number 14, consider and discuss amending the Kerrville 14 South construction fund budget to provide funding not to 15 exceed $6,200 for attorney's fees to develop the regional 16 wastewater treatment contract between the U.G.R.A. and the 17 City of Kerrville, with any unused funds to be returned to 18 the construction fund. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: This has been -- 20 Judge, this has been reviewed by the Grantworks folks, who 21 say this expense is an appropriate expense. It is for the 22 attorney's fees to draft the contract between U.G.R.A. and 23 the City of Kerrville for the treatment of the effluent that 24 comes from this project. And, as this item says, if all of 25 that $6,200 is not used, the remainder would be returned to 5-13-02 70 1 the construction budget fund. I so move. 2 (Discussion off the record.) 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll second the 4 motion. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 6 Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court 7 amend the Kerrville South construction fund budget to 8 provide funding not to exceed $6,200 for attorney's fees to 9 develop the regional wastewater treatment contract between 10 U.G.R.A. and the City of Kerrville, with any unused funds to 11 be returned to the construction fund. Any questions or 12 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 13 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 15 (No response.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Next item, 17 Item Number 15, is to consider and discuss authorizing 18 Grantworks to submit the 2001 T.C.D.A. Comprehensive Plan to 19 the Office of Rural Community Affairs for their review, 20 concurrent with the County's final review of the documents. 21 Commissioner Williams. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Last Thursday also, 23 Judge, in your absence, there was some discussion about 24 designation of Silver Creek Estates -- and that was the only 25 one referenced in those discussions -- being categorized in 5-13-02 71 1 the plan as a colonia. And I asked the Grantworks folks 2 present to take a look at that and come up with some 3 suggestion as to how we can accommodate the concerns of the 4 folks who live in that particular area. This morning, when 5 I cleaned out my e-mail box, I had an e-mail from 6 Mr. Hartzell of Grantworks, who is present today and will 7 speak on this issue also, and it says, We can designate 8 certain marginal, quote, unquote, colonia areas such as 9 Silver Creek Estates, Quail Run, Fawn Run, so forth as, 10 quote, potentially eligible rural subdivisions, unquote, 11 instead of colonia areas. It would serve the purpose of 12 differentiating between these areas and those with serious 13 identified needs, such as Kerrville South, Blue Ridge, Wood 14 Creek, Hill River, et cetera, while still giving the County 15 the flexibility it needs in using grant funds at some future 16 date for those areas if and when we determine to do so. We 17 can also simply eliminate certain areas from the plan if the 18 Court wishes. 19 To be honest, part of the reason we left in 20 the more marginal colonia areas was that we had information 21 on housing, land use, drainage, water, et cetera, et cetera, 22 et cetera, and figured it would be useful for the County and 23 U.G.R.A. to have it for future reference. This brings us 24 back to the previous idea of renaming the marginal areas to 25 something which would be less offensive. It also goes on to 5-13-02 72 1 say that, Be advised that we can make any changes prior to 2 court on Monday. I don't think we lose face by reevaluating 3 our designations, since several colonia areas do not fit the 4 public image very well, despite meeting the H.U.D. 5 definition. Mr. Hartzell, would you like to expand on that, 6 please? 7 MR. HARTZELL: Sure. Gifts, as well. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Box of stuff. 9 MR. HARTZELL: Oh, yeah. Yeah. My name Eric 10 Hartzell of Grantworks in Austin. This is Robin Sisco from 11 Grantworks also. Thanks for having us here today. Yeah, I 12 heard from Dave Tucker, who was present on a different issue 13 at the last meeting, about the issue, and so that was my 14 response to the Commissioner. I have a -- have you had -- 15 oh, she's handing it out to you, great. Within the handout 16 that Robin's passing around, there's a little bit more 17 explanation of what this particular grant program, the 18 Community Development Block Grant program, considers to be a 19 colonia area. It's sort of a similar situation to the term 20 "rural." Every program, every agency, every entity has a 21 different definition for what is rural. Colonias have 22 multiple definitions, depending on which program you're 23 talking about. 24 The way that the C.D.B.G., Community 25 Development Block Grant program, defines colonias is on the 5-13-02 73 1 second page of the handout: An unincorporated community 2 with 10 or more housing units with density of at least one 3 unit per three acres in the developed area, and it is 4 thought to have a low to moderate income population of at 5 least 51 percent. That can be verified through census data, 6 or it can be verified prior to a construction project 7 through a door-to-door survey. Then the other criteria 8 would be a significant portion of substandard housing, or 9 lacking centralized water or sewer service. And these are 10 the areas, again, that are the most likely to qualify for 11 grant assistance from the Colonia Fund or the Community 12 Development Fund or any of the other programs that are out 13 there for water and sewer. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Eric, let me 15 interrupt for a minute and ask you a question. What are the 16 benchmark numbers for low to moderate income? 17 MR. HARTZELL: The benchmark income numbers 18 for low to moderate income are -- man, I don't have that 19 with me. I believe in Kerr County, a family of four is 20 $33,000, maybe a little bit higher than that. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you. 22 MR. HARTZELL: Yeah. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If I might interrupt 24 again, Eric? 25 MR. HARTZELL: Yeah. 5-13-02 74 1 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That "or" -- 'cause I 2 went and looked this up, too, after our last meeting. That 3 "or" in there is a big conjunction, because if you just lack 4 centralized water or sewer services, and low to moderate 5 income, 51 percent, that meets the definition. It doesn't 6 have to have substandard housing. 7 MR. HARTZELL: That's correct. 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Quote, unquote, 9 substandard, which I know concerns some people. And so 10 it's -- it's -- if you have a colonia designation, it 11 doesn't necessarily mean that that area even has substandard 12 housing -- 13 MR. HARTZELL: That's correct. 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- necessarily. 15 MR. HARTZELL: It means it qualifies for the 16 grant programs. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It qualifies for the 18 grant program, that's correct. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you, 20 Eric. 21 MR. HARTZELL: Okay. Then -- so what we did 22 is, on certain areas such as Silver Creek, and I believe 23 there are three other areas that we redesignated after 24 looking at the data, these areas have the density and they 25 lack the services, but they are -- they don't have the 5-13-02 75 1 housing problems that Commissioner Griffin -- Commissioner 2 Griffin mentioned, and so we redesignated those areas as 3 potentially eligible. They would require a -- they may have 4 qualified for assistance at some future date, but they would 5 require a door-to-door survey of incomes before any kind of 6 project would be able to go forward there. And that was 7 sort of in anticipation of -- of what had happened at the 8 previous meeting, and we went ahead and made that change 9 already. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: You made -- or in your 11 e-mail, I guess, you mentioned a different definition or a 12 different term -- different terminology. 13 MR. HARTZELL: Yes. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's the terminology 15 again? 16 MR. HARTZELL: Potentially eligible area. I 17 couldn't think of a good one. That was about as close as I 18 could get without -- 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A P.E.A. 20 MR. HARTZELL: A pea, there you go. I -- 21 it's an area that's not a colonia, but it's possibly 22 eligible for some of these programs. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So, you have made 24 those modifications to the Kerr County plan? 25 MR. HARTZELL: Yes, we have. 5-13-02 76 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: And I guess your -- 2 your summary sheet, then, would reduce it from the previous 3 summary you gave us where you identified 15 potential areas. 4 Now you're identifying 13, and you're saying there are four 5 potentially eligible areas. 6 MR. HARTZELL: Right, there are 13. Because 7 at the workshop that was held with the U.G.R.A. and the 8 Commissioners Court about two weeks ago, two and a half 9 weeks ago, there were two additional areas identified by, I 10 believe, one of the Commissioners? Yes. And these areas 11 were, indeed, qualified -- qualified for the program, and so 12 those were added. So now we have a total number of areas -- 13 total areas of 17, four of which we've redesignated as 14 potentially eligible, and 13 of which remain definitely 15 eligible. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: All right. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If we were to find 18 additional areas or pockets or something happens, can we add 19 -- how hard is it to amend -- 20 MR. HARTZELL: Easily. Very easy to amend 21 the list. This is not an official designation by the Court 22 or by the State. It's a working document that can be 23 modified at any time. It can be -- it's used for reference. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Can we use the other 25 terminology everywhere, or do we have to call the other ones 5-13-02 77 1 colonias? And the reason -- only reason is that it is an 2 offensive term to some people. And -- 3 MR. HARTZELL: Yeah. It's a -- it's a 4 Colonia Plan funded from the Colonia Program, so it would be 5 kind of hard for us to get away with it. We could -- what 6 we could do possibly is, we'll turn in -- what we turn in to 7 the State for their review could use that terminology that 8 they require, and then we could come back later and modify 9 the language in the County's plan. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: This may be something 11 we want to take up with Harvey, and say that -- you know, 12 that, how about working on this next time around and just 13 come up with a different name? It -- 14 MR. HARTZELL: Yeah. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- would work. 16 MR. HARTZELL: An either/or name, maybe. 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think whatever's in the 18 State plan should be in the County plan. I'm not in favor 19 of having -- just to make it like we're not calling 20 something -- either we're calling it or not calling it. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I tell you, this 22 "potentially eligible," those words really give me 23 goosebumps. It makes me so happy, it feels good. 24 (Laughter.) 25 MR. HARTZELL: Great. 5-13-02 78 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's all we're doing 2 here. 3 MR. HARTZELL: Right. Right. 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: We're feeling good. 5 MR. HARTZELL: It's semantics. 6 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Playing 7 Dr. Feel-Good. 8 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. And 9 goosebumps -- this is goosebumps words, sure. 10 MR. HARTZELL: Sure. The whole point of the 11 plan is to identify those areas that may be eligible for 12 assistance -- might need the assistance and might be 13 eligible for the assistance. 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I understand. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is the review by the Office 16 of Rural Community Affairs a requirement of the grant? 17 MR. HARTZELL: Yes. That's the order -- yes, 18 it's a requirement. It's the final stage. Their -- what 19 they will do is, they will review to make sure that all the 20 elements are in place. They won't review it for content, 21 per se. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: What is the benefit of 23 submitting it for review by the Office of Rural Community 24 Affairs before the Court accepts and approves the final 25 document? 5-13-02 79 1 MR. HARTZELL: Because you can do that 2 concurrently. And what will happen is, at the very end, 3 after you've done your review and the State has done its 4 review, any changes can be made at once, and then it will 5 come to you for final approval with the State's -- the 6 State's changes would be structural, or, "You didn't address 7 this requirement of your contract." It's not going to have 8 anything to do with your content. I'm more worried about 9 content with the Court and structure with the State, so I 10 want to make sure that we make all corrections at once. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: All right. 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Saves from us having 13 to do it twice, I think. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Can I amend the -- 15 well, I'll make a motion which would amend a couple things, 16 and see if this will do it. That we authorize Grantworks to 17 submit the 2001 T.C.D.A. Colonia Comprehensive Plan as 18 amended to the Office of Rural Community Affairs for its 19 review prior to the County's final review of the document. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 22 Williams, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 23 authorize Grantworks to submit the 2001 T.C.D.A. 24 Comprehensive Plan as amended to the Office of Rural 25 Community Affairs for their review prior to the County's 5-13-02 80 1 final review of the document. Any questions or comments? 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Eric, are you sure that 3 you added the ones -- well, I assume that you -- the ones -- 4 the two that I brought up. 5 MR. HARTZELL: The Blue Ridge -- Blue Ridge, 6 I believe, was one. It's between Ingram and Kerrville. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: No, that's not mine. 8 MR. HARTZELL: That wasn't yours? There was 9 one over by Comfort. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The one by Comfort. 11 MR. HARTZELL: Yeah. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And -- okay. There was 13 another one over near that, halfway between Comfort and 14 Center Point, too. I'm not sure -- over there where the 15 old, uh -- 16 MR. HARTZELL: There were two areas north of 17 Center Point? 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think I had 19 identified one of those. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where the old rodeo arena 21 used to be, back behind Calvary Temple Church. 22 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Behind Calvary Temple 23 Church? I didn't identify that one. 24 MR. HARTZELL: I don't remember that one. 25 What's the exact location? And we can go look. 5-13-02 81 1 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: About halfway between 2 Comfort and Center Point, there's a little church there 3 called Calvary Temple Church. 4 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Behind there on the north 5 side of 27, Nickerson Farm. It's -- 6 MR. HARTZELL: It's off of Highway 27 on the 7 north side behind the Calvary Temple Church? 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: There's a road there. 9 MS. PIEPER: Nickerson Farm Road. 10 MR. HARTZELL: Nickerson Farm Road. 11 MR. JOHNSTON: I think the road is Nicks 12 Road. 13 MS. PIEPER: Oh, yeah. 14 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You'll check that 15 out? 16 MR. HARTZELL: Yes. Eighteen areas, then. 17 Okay. Yeah, we'll go check right now. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Before we vote on this, we 19 have a request by Mr. Lewis Cosby to address us on the 20 issue. Mr. Cosby, are you in the courtroom? 21 MR. COSBY: Yes, sir. 22 JUDGE HENNEKE: Come forward, please, sir. 23 MR. COSBY: Morning, gentlemen, and thank you 24 for allowing me to speak this morning. And I wanted to tell 25 you thanks for this. I appreciate it. Commissioner 5-13-02 82 1 Williams, thank you. Mr. Hartzell, thank you also, sir, for 2 taking another look at this. I appreciate that. And, as 3 long as we can -- as the newspaper -- I'm sure they're here; 4 both newspapers are here. If they'll get the word out, that 5 will make me feel a lot better about my property values if I 6 decide to sell something. But, again, thank you very much. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: You're welcome. Thank you, 8 Mr. Cosby. Any other questions or comments? If not, all in 9 favor of the motion, raise your right hand. 10 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 12 (No response.) 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. Seeing 14 Ms. Mindy in the audience, did you have an answer for us on 15 that first -- 16 MS. WILLIAMS: I think I do. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: We're going back here, 18 gentlemen, to Budget Amendment Number 1, which was for the 19 Commissioners Court in the Professional Services area, if 20 y'all want to turn to that. 21 MS. WILLIAMS: I was able to look at the 22 budget, and I talked with Rusty Hierholzer. I believe that 23 we will be able to move money out of his Jailers Salary line 24 item. He's had a few positions that he's not been able to 25 fill for a while, so he has a surplus there. The amount 5-13-02 83 1 that we need to move out of his line item, which is 2 10-512-104, would be $7,957.87. That covers the two that 3 are on his department. And I also found that we have moneys 4 left over from our independent audit. We have a $700 5 balance left over. I'd like to move $161.10, which will 6 cover the other item, the -- I believe it was Nancy Cavazos, 7 deductible. And that line item is 10-409-400. Those two 8 items together come up to $8,118.97. 9 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Nancy Cavazos? 10 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I know -- I thought the 12 name was -- 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: His mother. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Oh. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Good work, Mindy. 16 MS. WILLIAMS: I tried. 17 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, I'd like to 18 make a motion that we approve that suggestion. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 20 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 21 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 22 approve Budget Amendment Request Number 1 as outlined, and 23 those funds identified by the Auditor's office. Any 24 questions or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your 25 right hand. 5-13-02 84 1 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 3 (No response.) 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carried. 5 MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, ma'am. The next 7 item is Item Number 16, which is a public hearing on the 8 proposed revisions to the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and 9 Regulations. We're a bit early on this one, so before we 10 actually convene the public hearing, perhaps Commissioner 11 Letz has some introductory comments he'd like to make. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Stand up in your 13 chair, Jon, come on. 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only introductory 15 comments I really have on this is, I think we've -- the 16 Commissioners have all seen the revisions. They've been 17 announced to the public to look at, as well. And I 18 approached it a little bit different than the way we do 19 something in our public hearings; I did not put an action 20 item on the agenda. We'll do that at our next meeting. I 21 really wanted -- because this is a confusing document and 22 there's lots of very small changes, I wanted us to have an 23 actual completed, revised document that we vote on, as 24 opposed to hoping we get everything incorporated into it. 25 But, other than that, I really don't have any comments. 5-13-02 85 1 There's a few additional ones that I can either talk about 2 now that are pretty minor scope, one of them being the 3 commercial subdivision that we didn't really talk about 4 earlier, but that is my -- my copy adds language there. And 5 I really just want to get the public hearing over with so we 6 can receive comments. I don't think we're changing anything 7 of substance, really. 8 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I have a question. 9 Can you sort of outline for us, in two minutes, sort of the 10 broad areas that have been changed, like commercial 11 subdivisions, just so that we get a flavor for -- and the 12 public can get a flavor for what's in there? 13 COMMISSIONER LETZ: What's changing? 14 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Well, let's do the Water 16 Availability Requirements first. That's -- these are in 17 order also; it's part of the public hearing and the 18 revisions. There, we're just making some name changes 19 regarding Headwaters and cleaning up -- cleaning up some 20 language on the number of connections. And the other change 21 that we have not talked about before this is under 22 sufficiency of water, and the language there came up due to 23 a meeting I had with Cameron -- actually, no, with Cameron's 24 board members out at Headwaters. And it was -- our language 25 says a well is deemed to be sufficient -- I'm 5-13-02 86 1 paraphrasing -- if it produces 8 to 10 gallons per minute. 2 And the discussion was, is it 8 or is it 10? So, let's just 3 say -- you know, just make it 10, get rid of the word -- I 4 mean, why have it "8 to 10"? It makes no sense. Either 5 10 gallons per minute will be sufficient or -- or not. So, 6 that's something -- more of a clean-up type thing. I don't 7 know why we put that range in there originally. 8 On the Subdivision Rules, themselves, the -- 9 under commercial driveway, which is one we talked about this 10 morning, we currently have language regarding condominiums, 11 land developments, cluster homes or cluster developments, 12 and I just -- I just added to that paragraph commercial 13 subdivisions, and we'll delete commercial subdivisions 14 everywhere else in the rules, because I just don't think -- 15 I think you have to look at each commercial subdivison 16 independently. That will mean that we will, you know, not 17 definitely have rules for commercial subdivisions, which is 18 probably good, considering we had to grant four variances to 19 get one through this morning. And I think -- and that we'll 20 put some other language in that same provision that we will 21 use as a guide. The rest of the Subdivision Rules, we're 22 not throwing them out the window for these other 23 special-type developments, but we're going to have to look 24 at them on a case-by-case basis. 25 Another major change is on the certifications 5-13-02 87 1 by Headwaters and by U.G.R.A. And we're pretty much only 2 asking them to look at the plats that they need to look at. 3 Right now, they're pretty much reviewing all plats. And, 4 from a Headwaters standpoint, if -- you know, the only time 5 they will look at a subdivision is if there's a question on 6 water availability, basically, interpreting well 7 information, or let's say public water system with less than 8 16 connections. Other than that, they're not going to look 9 at it. It's going to be deemed that if it has -- if it 10 meets our Subdivision Rules and has the acreage exemption 11 requirement, water availability, they don't need to look at 12 it. I think that will save time, and also save developers 13 money. Every time one of these goes to one of these 14 agencies, it's a $25 or different fee. And similar with 15 U.G.R.A. and the on-site -- or our Designated 16 Representative, Stuart, and the on-site sewage facilities. 17 They're really not going to look at that many of them, 18 unless there is less than 5-acre subdivision tracts. If 19 it's a 5-acre minimum, they don't individually have to go 20 out and look at each plat -- each subdivision. There would 21 be language added to each plat that just puts on notice that 22 prior to construction, the owners are required to, you know, 23 meet with our -- or be in compliance with our on-site 24 septic, but they don't look at it ahead of time. 25 Floodplains will still go through Stuart Barron, our 5-13-02 88 1 representative on floodplains. That will be because of the, 2 I guess, legal requirements there. 3 And the other area of major improvement or 4 major -- I hope it's improvement, is putting in an alternate 5 plat approval process. It's kind of going back to what we 6 used to call a minor replat or a minor plat. And I think 7 there is room for this when we read the State rules. And it 8 basically says that if you're doing a subdivision with less 9 than four lots, it can come to the court one time. There's 10 not a preliminary and final; there's just a final. And this 11 would also apply for a revision, if you're just making a 12 revision that's only affecting four plats or four lots or 13 less. 14 MR. VOELKEL: No, is it four lots or less, or 15 under four lots? I think less. 16 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Less than four lots. 17 MR. VOELKEL: So, actually three lots. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Three lots or less on 19 both of those. And the same thing, revision. They can come 20 to the court at one time, but the revision still will have 21 to have the public hearing if it's required currently. 22 That's something we can't waive if it's a State requirement, 23 but it should make it a little bit easier. And also, I 24 might add that it's not mandatory. If the Commissioner of 25 the precinct wants it to come for a preliminary, if there's 5-13-02 89 1 some kind of request that's a little bit strange, the 2 Commissioner of the precinct can say it has to come for a 3 preliminary and a final, but that's kind of the Commissioner 4 of each precinct's option. Just some modifications to the 5 routing slips, that kind of -- and that's something that, 6 really, when we're finally complete with the revisions and 7 they're approved by the Court, I'll get with Truby and we'll 8 go through, make all those routing slips, you know, comply 9 and work with the -- the rules. And I think the -- there's 10 a question on cattle guards that we talked about earlier. 11 I -- from relooking at it, I think our language is pretty 12 good on cattle guards, I think. But on some road cuts and 13 some depths, we may look at that, try to make it a little 14 bit more uniform; probably raise to it 30 inches, because I 15 think utility companies require about 30 inches instead of 16 the 36 that we require. That's pretty much it. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. At this time, we will 18 recess the Kerr County Commissioners meeting and open a 19 public hearing on the proposed revisions to the Kerr County 20 Subdivision Rules and Regulations, as very quickly outlined 21 by Commissioner Letz. 22 (The regular Commissioners Court meeting was closed at 11:04 a.m., and a public hearing 23 was held in open court, as follows:) 24 P U B L I C H E A R I N G 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Is there anyone who would 5-13-02 90 1 like to address the Court on the issue of the proposed 2 revisions to the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and 3 Regulations? Is there anyone who has any comments or who 4 would like to address the Court on the issue of the proposed 5 revisions to the Kerr County Subdivision Rules and 6 Regulations? Don? 7 MR. VOELKEL: My name is Don Voelkel, and I 8 just had a -- a question of -- you mentioned the routing 9 slips and all, how you're trying to tackle them, and I think 10 it's a good thing we've been doing these. I have a question 11 about the way -- I didn't notice anything in here changing 12 the preliminary/final plat, as far as the processes and all, 13 and maybe I've been misinformed over the years. The way I 14 read the regulations and the routing slip for final plat, 15 you have to make the application, submit the plats, get all 16 the signatures on the routing slip, and you have to submit 17 it 30 days before the meeting, and that's what it says in 18 the Subdivision Regulations. And the Subdivision 19 Regulations on the preliminary plat, it doesn't say 30 days; 20 it just says submit them to the -- to the Road and Bridge 21 Department. And in the past, we've gotten those in -- and 22 it used to say seven days, I think, on the old routing 23 slips, but somewhere it just changed to 30 days. 24 And I was trying to submit the one I had this 25 morning back in April. Actually, it was going to -- I had 5-13-02 91 1 it on for -- tried to get it on the first or second meeting 2 in April, and Truby informed me, "No, it has to be 30 days. 3 You have to wait 30 days." And I said, "Well, that's not in 4 the Subdivision Regulations. I know it says it on the 5 routing slip." And I said, "Why do we have to have 30 days 6 just to get on for a preliminary plat?" I can understand 7 the 30 days for the final, so that everything can be done, 8 all the -- you know, the signatures gotten and everybody 9 reviews it, but I didn't understand the 30 days for the 10 preliminary. And she said, "Well, we have to have 11 notification." I said, "Well, I'm notifying everybody. I'm 12 taking the routing slip around; I'm getting all the 13 signatures, delivering plats to everybody. I don't 14 understand why it has to be 30 days." That was my question, 15 and I didn't see anything in this that specifically 16 addressed that, and I think it's a confusion from what it 17 used to be to what evidently is now on the routing slip. 18 And I didn't know if that's something that 19 came from y'all, or it -- I don't know why that 30 days came 20 in on the preliminary, and -- and that's why I wanted to 21 discuss it, see if y'all felt the need for 30 days before 22 each meeting. Because this shifted us with -- we should 23 have been getting final approval sometime in May to 24 June 24th, and what -- and the reason I'm mentioning this 25 is, my clients are time-sensitive, money-sensitive. Time is 5-13-02 92 1 money, and they -- if they have to wait an extra month, it 2 just costs -- my clients have -- they haven't sold anything 3 out here, but they have people lined up to buy these, just 4 waiting on the approvals. And I just wanted to get y'all's 5 opinion on it. 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm with you on the -- 7 I'm with you on the preliminary. The -- I don't understand 8 why we would have this long time frame. But on the final, I 9 do. 10 MR. VOELKEL: Right, and it's in the regs 11 that way. 12 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Need to dot all the 13 I's, cross all the T's, make sure everything's done 14 properly. But I agree with you on the first one. 15 MR. VOELKEL: And I think -- this is my 16 opinion. That's why I wanted to bring it up to y'all. I 17 don't see the need for 30 days, especially when it's on us 18 to notify everybody in the first place. Once we get all the 19 signatures and everything -- and it used to have seven days 20 on the original routing slips, that I -- I don't know if -- 21 if they were in place for when Frank came in, or the ones 22 that originally came up. We had to get the -- submit it to 23 them seven days prior to the pre-meeting, and then before 24 the meeting make sure that he gets all of the -- the routing 25 slip with all the signatures. And then, all of a sudden, 5-13-02 93 1 the 30 days showed up on the routing slip, and I didn't 2 really know anything about it. 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I think we -- I don't -- 4 Road and Bridge, as I recall, when we had our committee -- 5 MR. VOELKEL: Yeah. 6 COMMISSIONER LETZ: -- several years ago, it 7 was changed at that point, because seven days was too much 8 for Road and Bridge. I mean, it depends on how the seven 9 days fell. It was too quick, and it was just changed to 30 10 days, as I recall, just because that's what we did on the 11 other one, on final plat approval. I think it needs to be 12 -- and I don't have any problem with going with a shorter 13 time at all. I think it's -- you know, as long as Road and 14 Bridge can get it done reasonably in a shorter period. It 15 takes a week to get it on the agenda, so, I mean, one week 16 gone just to get it on our agenda. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What I was thinking 18 while -- while we've been talking is that -- is that -- and, 19 Franklin, I'd like to hear your opinion on this, but I 20 think, like, 10 days on a preliminary might be enough, 21 because you -- you just need to review it and make sure that 22 all the paperwork is there. We're going to get a shot at it 23 during the preliminary -- or during the discussion on the 24 preliminary plat, so maybe something like 10 days would 25 work. And then, because there is this is built-in week just 5-13-02 94 1 to get it on the agenda, which is -- that would leave maybe 2 three or four days for -- 3 MR. JOHNSTON: Well, if you think about it, 4 if you have 10 days, that only gives us three days actually 5 to look at it. 6 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's what I'm 7 saying. 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say 10 working days. 9 Then you've covered it. 10 MR. VOELKEL: Well, but once I get it to him 11 10 days prior, he still has 10 days. It's not like he ends 12 his review in three days. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's right. 14 MR. VOELKEL: He still has the full 10 days. 15 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: All I'm saying is, 16 preliminary plat, if you had it 10 days in advance of the 17 court meeting that it's proposed for the preliminary plat, 18 that would give you three days to make a quick review, 19 "Yeah, it looks pretty good," and you've still got the rest 20 of the week to say, Hey, make sure you got the letter, or 21 the -- whatever it is that may be required. I think maybe 22 10 days would be workable for a preliminary, and then the 30 23 days for the final. 24 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. So -- 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Does that sound 5-13-02 95 1 reasonable, Franklin? 2 MR. JOHNSTON: Yeah. I think the problem 3 also we're having is we -- it didn't give us time to get 4 feedback from -- you know, if there were any from U.G.R.A. 5 or Headwaters. Any of the other groups involved, you know, 6 couldn't turn around that fast and actually make a comment. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's the reason I 8 say, for getting a preliminary plat on the agenda, you could 9 go ahead, if it looks like it to you and in your judgment 10 that it's going to be okay, to get it on the agenda. If 11 things don't work out over the next -- that 10-day period, 12 when it comes up on the agenda -- that's what I'm talking 13 about, when you stand up and say, "We didn't get there on 14 this one. We're going to have to put it off another 15 session." 16 MR. JOHNSTON: However, you said this morning 17 you wanted my approval before it went on the agenda. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, what -- what I'm 19 saying is that on a preliminary plat, if you can't get all 20 the squares -- 99 percent of the time, I think you will on 21 the preliminary. 22 MR. VOELKEL: I think some of the onus needs 23 to go to not just me and Lee, but all the surveyors, to -- 24 don't get it to Frank unless you think it's ready to go. 25 And there's always little minor things, like I had that -- 5-13-02 96 1 instead of "replat," I should have "revision." That's 2 things we can fix in the next 30 days, you know. We've got 3 a lot of time to fix it. 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Sure. 5 MR. VOELKEL: But it should be the onus on 6 the surveyor to say, "Hey, don't take it to Frank unless you 7 expect it's going to be pretty close." And we have all the 8 regulations. I mean, it's something -- we're getting to the 9 point where we're getting pretty close. It's just some 10 minor little things. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Most of those 12 preliminary plats, I think you could look at, and in 13 realtime, and say, "Partner, it ain't ready," you know. 14 "Bring it back when have you so-and-so and so on." It's -- 15 MR. JOHNSTON: Right, and that works well 16 with the Voelkels and local surveyors that know the routine, 17 but we get some in from -- you know, a guy from San Antonio 18 or Houston or someplace. 19 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Mm-hmm. 20 MR. JOHNSTON: Boerne. 21 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: And those, you may 22 have to make a decision right then, "I can't do it in 10 23 days. Therefore, it ain't going." 24 MR. JOHNSTON: Maybe there's some discretion 25 in how long we can take. 5-13-02 97 1 MR. VOELKEL: But give the local surveyors 10 2 days. 3 (Laughter.) 4 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Well, but the thing 5 is, the guideline is 10 days minimum. Now, if there's 6 something that's critical, you know, then maybe it may take 7 longer. 8 MR. JOHNSTON: Could be real complicated to 9 say, "Wait a minute, we need time to look at it." I think 10 there's some discretion time in there. We might need to -- 11 MR. VOELKEL: But the thing is, if you go 12 with the 30, then you don't have any discretion, and Frank 13 can't look at this and -- 14 COMMISSIONER LETZ: The rules don't say 30. 15 The rules don't have a date. 16 MR. VOELKEL: Right, it's just the routing 17 slip, and I don't know where that -- if it's part of the 18 rules by the fact it's in there, but that's what I want to 19 hopefully clarify. 20 MR. JOHNSTON: Period of time as -- you know, 21 as determined by the County Engineer or something. Give 22 them a chance to look at it. If it's simple, it can go 23 right on through. If it's complicated, I want to take more 24 time to evaluate it. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. And on the 5-13-02 98 1 routing slip, it says a minimum number of 10 days. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: Eleven. 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Eleven days, okay. 4 Well, now we're negotiating. But, anyway, with the point 5 that there should be a way of -- in the preliminary platting 6 process, of sort of speeding this process up a little bit so 7 we can at least get to the point where we can start doing 8 the dirty work on it. 9 MR. VOELKEL: And then you still have the 30 10 days. 11 MR. JOHNSTON: Back when it was seven days, 12 what they would do is bring it, you know, on Tuesday. It 13 went -- or Monday, when it went on the agenda. And, you 14 know, totally -- we didn't have any idea what it was, and 15 then all we had was the rest of the week to try to figure 16 out what it was, and sometimes we couldn't do that. 17 MR. VOELKEL: I think the 10 days or 11 would 18 be better than the seven. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I really think 14. And 20 the reason I say that is, I'm trying to get -- I just think 21 -- I just -- there's a lot going into these, and it's a 22 preliminary. When it comes to the Court for the preliminary 23 approval, we're pretty much setting what's going to be -- 24 what the subdivision's going to look like, and there's a lot 25 of drainage issues and looking at the topography, I mean, 5-13-02 99 1 all kinds of things that Franklin needs to look at. And I 2 think also -- you know, I just think we need to give Road 3 and Bridge or Franklin ample time to look at it, and a week 4 should be enough. But I think that Franklin -- if it's a 5 certain situation, I think it's at his discretion when it 6 gets on. 7 MR. JOHNSTON: I think 14 days minimum, or 8 determined by the County Engineer. 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Most of the time, the 10 ones that you are processing -- and particularly the local 11 folks know what's going to be on there. If the stuff on the 12 routing slip is not done, it can't get on. You know, you 13 just kick it back, and most of the time they're there. 14 MR. VOELKEL: That's -- I just wanted to 15 throw that out, because it just seemed like something that 16 would be more workable, and, like, leave it up to Frank. If 17 it's a -- you know, lot of streets going in, lot of drainage 18 infrastructure, he might want more time than 14 days, and I 19 don't have a problem with that. But the minor ones are what 20 I think would be a lot simpler to -- if we use that. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: But what we should do is make 22 it a minimum number of 14 days, and then make it clear, 23 though, that when it goes on the agenda is up to the 24 discretion of the County Engineer. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Mm-hmm. 5-13-02 100 1 MR. VOELKEL: Yeah. 2 JUDGE HENNEKE: So we don't have a situation 3 where somebody drops one that's, you know, 2,000 acres and 4 700 lots -- 5 MR. VOELKEL: Right. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- on Franklin 14 days in 7 advance, and says, "No, it says it will be on the next 8 agenda." Give him the ability to -- to hold them off while 9 he takes a look at it. 10 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Yeah. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Minimum of 14 days, but with 12 some discretion as to when it actually goes on the agenda. 13 Any other comments regarding revisions to the Subdivision -- 14 MS. PIEPER: Judge, I have a suggestion. 15 When the developers know that they're having revisions of 16 plats, if they can bring in addresses of the landowners at 17 that point, it would be a lot helpful. 18 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: A revision of plat? 19 MS. PIEPER: So we can do the public notice 20 and notify all the landowners by mail. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: That would probably be 22 something really worthwhile. 23 MS. PIEPER: And if you still have the fees 24 in there, that needs to be taken out as well. 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That's right. 5-13-02 101 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: On original revision of 2 plat, the -- add language that the addresses of all -- 3 MS. PIEPER: The names and addresses of all 4 the landowners of the subdivision be brought to court at 5 that time. 6 MR. VOELKEL: Yeah, submitted with the 7 preliminary plat. She asked me this morning to get those 8 for the ones I had. I told her I'd take care of that. If 9 it's part of the regulations that I have to bring them in, 10 she doesn't have to keep asking us for it. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's a good idea. Good, 12 timely issue. 13 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: That will save some 14 time also. 15 MR. VOELKEL: Right. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other comments? 17 COMMISSIONER LETZ: I have one. More of a 18 question, really, to Franklin, and also the Voelkels, 'cause 19 they're both here. Concept plans. It seems that those -- 20 you know, I don't get very -- I don't get any of them any 21 more, and for a while we were getting them. Is that 22 something that we should delete, or put a requirement that 23 if they're a certain size only? And a lot of the 24 subdivisions we've been getting recently, they've been 25 probably less than 10 lots, anyway. Probably less than 5-13-02 102 1 that, a lot of them, and probably no reason for a concept 2 plan. Would it be helpful to put a -- like, if it's a 3 subdivision of 10, 15 lots or more, then we do have a 4 concept plan; if it's less than that, we don't need one? Or 5 do we need one at all? 6 MR. JOHNSTON: I think we need the idea of a 7 concept plan. I think some of them -- some large 8 subdivisions, it's probably a good idea to do it. Some of 9 them are just kind of -- you know, people want to do 10 something that kind of doesn't fit the rules, and I'd rather 11 bring it in here, talk to the Court about it, you know, 12 before they go to the expense of doing the actual survey on 13 it. 14 MR. VOELKEL: On behalf of the -- we tell our 15 clients that's the first step. And I know we've had several 16 of them -- I think Bill, I think Larry, we've had some in 17 there. I think it's a real effective tool, because it lets 18 the -- I make the owner come in, because they're there and 19 they can ask questions and then -- and then Franklin or the 20 Commissioner can ask questions of them. I think it's -- I 21 wouldn't restrict it, 'cause I think I want all my clients 22 to come in and be able to sit down with -- especially with 23 Franklin and the Commissioner involved, because that way 24 everybody lays everything out, what you plan on doing. 25 'Cause otherwise, you get to the preliminary plat and 5-13-02 103 1 Franklin gets it cold. That's one of the reasons I think, 2 if you do that process, it gives Frank, you know, a heads-up 3 and he knows what's coming when he gets the preliminary 4 plat. That's why I felt like 30 days was, you know, kind of 5 stretching it, because he's already seen everything 6 preliminarily at the conference, and then he's able to take 7 the preliminary plat and say, "Well, yeah, they did what 8 they said they were going to do." And I don't have a 9 problem with 14 days, either. I mean, I think Frank needs a 10 little bit more time. He's not in there every day, so he 11 needs a couple of days leeway, and I think giving him 14 12 days -- but, by the fact that he's already had the 13 preliminary concept -- and, Larry, Bill, y'all know I've had 14 some with y'all recently. It gives everybody a chance to 15 review it. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We're talking about 17 one of the things that I've just sort of come up on, and in 18 fact have discussed it with -- with several of the 19 developers and the surveyors and all around, and that is, it 20 is so much easier if they will sit down with Road and Bridge 21 and me, and I don't care if it's nothing more than a scratch 22 pad, and saying, "Here's what I want to do." And you can 23 immediately discover some things that just won't work, and 24 so you save them a lot of time. If -- if everybody did 25 that, I think the subdivision process would be much quicker. 5-13-02 104 1 And that is to have a preliminary meeting; not so much a 2 fancy, drawn-up plan or anything, but just if nothing more 3 than just a -- a working plat with some lines drawn on it 4 that says, "Here's what we want to do." 5 MR. JOHNSTON: I think it's part of the 6 process to do that. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Make that as part of 8 the process. I think we can do that. I think we solve a 9 lot of problems. I know it sure has for me. 10 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I agree with Don and 11 Larry, that there is value in the presentation of a 12 preliminary, whether it's a formal presentation or an 13 informal get-together. On the couple occasions that we've 14 done that, we've identified problems up front that perhaps 15 the developer hadn't known about. 16 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: It's just amazing how 17 much easier the developer will accept that when he hasn't 18 spent any money yet with anybody. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: That's right. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: They will accept those 21 changes and try to get it the way we want it in the rules. 22 And if -- but once you start spending the big bucks on the 23 Voelkels -- 24 (Laughter.) 25 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: You know, once you 5-13-02 105 1 start spending -- they start spending money, they're much 2 less likely to be amenable to saying, "Well, wait a minute. 3 Can't this work?" You know, "It looked good. My engineer 4 thought it was good, and ..." Well, no, it just doesn't 5 meet the rules. 6 MR. VOELKEL: And it just helps get you in 7 the right direction so that you and Franklin and I have the 8 chance to tell this man or woman what -- what the 9 requirements are, so that they don't present something to 10 Franklin that's not going to work. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Right. 12 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other comments on the 14 proposed revisions to the Subdivision Rules and Regulations? 15 One more time, any other comments from the public during 16 this public hearing on the proposed revisions of the Kerr 17 County Subdivision Rules and Regulations? Hearing none, we 18 will close the public hearing on the proposed revisions to 19 the Kerrville -- Kerr County Subdivision Rules and 20 Regulations, and reconvene the regular meeting of the Kerr 21 County Commissioners Court. 22 (The public hearing was concluded at 11:21 a.m., and the regular Commissioners Court 23 meeting was reopened.) 24 - - - - - - - - - - 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: Commissioner Letz, you'll put 5-13-02 106 1 that back on the agenda at such time as you've got 2 everything -- 3 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Should be next meeting. 4 It's pretty much done. The only person I need to speak 5 with, other than Road and Bridge, is Stuart Barron on the -- 6 some language on the plat, the certification -- actually, 7 not language, but it's the certification. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, very good. Let's turn 9 to the next and last item on the agenda, Item Number 17, 10 consider and discuss restructuring the Kerr County Courts 11 Collection Department to include the promotion of Brad 12 Alford to Chief Collections Officer effective July 1, 2002, 13 at an annual salary of $27,000, and create a full-time 14 Collections Officer at a pay rate of Grade 17. Further, 15 discuss requirements for number two position and potential 16 candidates for the position of Collections Officer effective 17 June 1, and in executive session. Commissioner Baldwin. 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, sir, thank you. 19 And, gentlemen, you remember several years ago Mr. Duncan 20 came in and the County Court at Law Judge came in and 21 proposed this program, and my first thought was, "Oh, no, 22 another program." And we had actually even talked about 23 letting the thing run for one year -- my thoughts were 24 letting this thing run for one year, and if it wasn't at 25 least paying for itself, it needs to be thrown in the trash 5-13-02 107 1 and forgotten forevermore. But, at the end of that first 2 year, I saw the success of it, and have since become a huge 3 fan of the program. I've seen Mr. Duncan and -- and the 4 department making presentations all over the state. I went 5 to Austin and saw that they became an associate member of 6 the Texas Association of Counties. And, so, what I'm saying 7 is -- is that I think it's an absolutely fantastic program. 8 And now Mr. Duncan is going on to greener pastures, if you 9 can call Florida greener, and it's time to restructure that 10 department. And, to me, as you see in our notes in the back 11 here, that approximately 80 -- $80,000 a month stays -- 12 because of collections, stays in Kerr County, and that's 13 pretty exciting. Those are pretty exciting numbers, in my 14 opinion, so I -- I'm excited about the possibilities of what 15 can happen with the Collections Department here in Kerr 16 County. 17 Now, what I'd like to do first is deal 18 with -- deal with Brad Alford's position first, an actual 19 court order, and then talk about the number two slot. Now, 20 I know I put Brad Alford's name there to move him up to the 21 Chief Collection Officer, and at an annual salary of 27 22 grand. To be honest with you, I'm not real clear where I 23 got that number, but it was put together by somebody who 24 knows more than I do; I can tell you that. But I think that 25 we should have a discussion about that. I spoke with him 5-13-02 108 1 last week, and he said to me that he would -- he would be 2 very happy with the $27,000. It's a salary increase for 3 him, and he would be very happy with the opportunity to 4 serve us as the chief collector. 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: I'll jump in here and say 6 Brad has been doing the -- he's been the number two, and 7 actually the actual collector, 'cause Russ Duncan is never 8 here; he's always off running around the state doing his 9 thing, for at least a year, and has -- has a lot of 10 knowledge about the systems and the programs and the method 11 by which the Collections Department actually goes about 12 bringing in the -- the sheaves, so to speak. And, since 13 Russ has decided to abandon us -- and I personally will 14 never forgive him for that, but -- 15 (Laughter.) 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: -- I think the only logical 17 candidate for the Chief Collections Officer is the man who's 18 essentially been -- been doing the work down in the trenches 19 down there for a year, year and a half or whatever it is, 20 which is Brad Alford. Mr. Duncan? 21 MR. DUNCAN: May I address the Court, 22 Honorable Judge, Commissioners? I -- you know, I look at 23 the position as most qualified. I'm not much on the 24 political end of the spectrum in hiring people. When I hire 25 somebody, I look at somebody who can do the job and will 5-13-02 109 1 continue to do the job. And Mr. Alford's current salary, 2 not counting benefits, runs about $22,989, and so that's 3 somewhat of -- about a $4,000 boost for him. But, to go out 4 at this point in time and try to find someone with his 5 qualifications and background is going to be a tough 6 situation, so I would strongly ask this Commissioners Court 7 to consider Mr. Alford for that position. Also, 8 Mr. Baldwin, I'd like to make one correction. You gave us a 9 6-month sunset clause at the original part of the collection 10 program, not a year. 11 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Quicker. 12 MR. DUNCAN: To get off the ground. 13 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That's a little bit 14 long, but -- 15 MR. DUNCAN: But, anyway, that is my 16 thinking. Just to give the board some -- Commissioners 17 Court something right now, I went back to 1980 and ran a 18 report to current. There's been $5,789,665 that has been 19 assessed in the County Court at Law alone. Of that, what is 20 currently paid is $5,202,573, which leaves an outstanding 21 balance of about $587,091. That's about a 99 -- 89 percent 22 collections rate. Now, I must tell you, there's a hidden 23 agenda there. We have worked very hard back through '91, 24 because trying to work old money is difficult, and trying to 25 keep up with the -- 'cause you want to get the current money 5-13-02 110 1 first. So, a lot of this money -- that's this $500,000 -- 2 is back from '91 back, and you need to keep on working on 3 it, 'cause that money is doable. I don't give up. I don't 4 want to turn it over to a collection agency or anything 5 else. I think that money's doable, but we collect a lot of 6 money. And I must tell you -- County Attorney's office is 7 here -- the assessments from 1997, when we started this 8 thing, to current, has -- or '96, has just about tripled. I 9 mean, the fines have gone up significantly. Used to be a 10 fine was $150, $200. Now we're looking at $500 to $1,500 in 11 fines. Court costs have moved up. Every time we turn 12 around, the Legislature is edicting a new court cost on us. 13 So, our court costs have gone up significantly, and I guess 14 will continue to do so. But we have made some inroads now 15 with that $2 transaction fee I got through the Legislature. 16 Every time anybody makes a payment, $2 goes into the fund. 17 That is also helpful. And with that, I will sit down, shut 18 up, and be at your pleasure. 19 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question. The backup 20 material talks about the fact that your department collects 21 about $92,000 per month. That's well over a million dollars 22 a year. Is that -- 23 MR. DUNCAN: That's -- 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: -- that is the case? 25 MR. DUNCAN: Yeah, that's the case. And 5-13-02 111 1 that -- the tough money is Linda Uecker's money. District 2 Clerk money -- district courts, a lot of the people go to 3 prison; a lot of people go to state jail. We've got to 4 catch them when they come out. We've got to work the parole 5 board, catch people after state jail. That's the most 6 difficult money. Also, seems like felons are the ones that 7 we have to track down more, and there's a whole different 8 set of rules. In County Court at Law, you don't pay me and 9 I can always go and get the Judge to issue a capias, an 10 order for incarceration, put you in jail. You sit out at 11 $50 a day, and then the Sheriff can bill you for $20 a day 12 of that time sitting in jail. And in district courts, it's 13 a subject of interpretation of the Code of Criminal 14 Procedures, and the District Attorney's office and our 15 district courts have chosen to interpret them that they 16 can't do that, even though I think you can. And we're 17 working in the Legislature this year to change some of that. 18 I've got about three pieces of legislation working to clear 19 that stuff up. But the money -- that money can go up. I 20 mean, we -- we have come a long way. We started from 21 scratch, and we've had to make a lot of inroads and a lot of 22 changes and work in a lot of strange places with a lot of 23 different people, like the Legislature, and -- but we're 24 getting there. And I think this next legislative session, 25 we'll see some things done that will enhance collections 5-13-02 112 1 significantly. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Question for the 3 Judge, then. Currently, the law does not require us to 4 budget these moneys; is that correct? But under the new 5 GASB rules, we have to budget for a certain amount of this 6 money; is that correct? 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think -- 8 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Or do we do it? 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: We budget for it now. This 10 is not an unbudgeted -- this is not a slush fund. 11 COMMISSIONER LETZ: We have to track it. 12 Under GASB, we're going to have to track it a lot closer. 13 JUDGE HENNEKE: Track it differently. 14 MR. DUNCAN: Your bond rating. 15 JUDGE HENNEKE: If you take -- the 16 uncollected fines and court costs will now be an account 17 receivable. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay, that's what I 19 was -- 20 MR. DUNCAN: That's very important. 21 JUDGE HENNEKE: Used to offset your assets. 22 It's a whole different concept; seems strange to me. 23 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: We budget based on 24 your track record, an average of what you do? 25 MR. DUNCAN: Yeah. My budget last year -- 5-13-02 113 1 original budget ran out to about $62,258. That's including 2 a $6,000 commitment that we have every year from the 3 Probation Department. 4 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Okay. 5 COMMISSIONER LETZ: My only comment is -- and 6 it's, you know, nothing -- not a personal issue. It's more 7 just a slot, you know, classification. We need, I think, 8 to -- whoever we put in as head of this department is going 9 to be more like a department head. I think we need to look 10 at all the other department heads that work for the 11 Commissioners Court and make sure -- and then look at the 12 duties and make sure that we're not paying -- you know, 13 getting out of line with basically the people -- number of 14 people they supervise, and we're basically not hurting 15 ourselves. I don't know what the salaries are off the top 16 of my head. I know, clearly, this is not like a Road and 17 Bridge function where we have a huge -- but I think we need 18 to make sure that we're not getting ourselves in trouble by 19 just arbitrarily pulling a number out of the sky. 20 MR. DUNCAN: I sat down with Barbara Nemec 21 and went over this position with her, and we looked at 22 everything from our dogcatcher up to our computer person, 23 and -- and the numbers that came up were what was suggested 24 by her department, being the personnel person, rather than 25 just picking some number out of the air, kind of. 5-13-02 114 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: That's where the $27,000 2 came from. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: So, Barbara -- the 4 County Treasurer is where the $27,000 came from? 5 MR. DUNCAN: Yeah, somewhere along that -- 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: And Grade 17, and what 7 step? 8 MR. DUNCAN: Grade 17 would come out to 9 $22,500 annually on the new position. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: That's Step 1. 11 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Step 1? 12 MR. DUNCAN: That comes out to -- with 13 benefits -- with benefits and perks and all that good stuff, 14 about $2,494 a month. 15 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Say that again, Russ. 16 Seventeen equals 22 what? 17 MR. DUNCAN: $22,500 annually. The monthly 18 salary plus benefit package comes out to $2,494 a month. 19 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And, is the -- are the 20 duties envisioned for that person comparable to duties in 21 someone like Jannett's or Linda's office? 22 MR. DUNCAN: They're almost -- they are a 23 deputy kind of person. The only thing we don't do that -- 24 that I don't do, and I don't want to ever do, because it's 25 just duplicating effort, and that is the money end of it. 5-13-02 115 1 You know, you got another audit trail, you got all kinds -- 2 we've had past problems in that area, and we would -- we are 3 the contract people and we are the assurance people. We 4 still hold them accountable to pay the money to either 5 Ms. Pieper or Ms. Uecker, and we don't want to go there. We 6 just don't want to go to that place. But ours is tracking, 7 auditing, follow-up, and -- and instant monitoring of what's 8 going on. 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Grade 17, as I understand it, 10 is the same as Jannett's administrative accounting clerk? 11 MS. PIEPER: Administrative. 12 JUDGE HENNEKE: Administrative clerk. 13 MR. DUNCAN: Sammie. 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: And comparable position in 15 Linda's office operations. So, I mean, that's how they kind 16 of viewed the -- they have a lot of responsibility, far 17 above just a regular clerk. And -- 18 MR. DUNCAN: And this job is -- if you take 19 these two jobs and you look at whoever your Chief of 20 Collections is and your assistant collections, they're doing 21 the same thing. I mean, the Chief of Collections has just 22 got more reporting duties and some other duties that go 23 along, but -- but basically day-to-day operation, it's 24 monitoring. They're auditing, monitoring, setting up 25 agreements. 5-13-02 116 1 COMMISSIONER LETZ: If -- I guess my concern 2 is that we're ending up with no clerks, then. I mean, 3 we're -- how do you run the office if you don't have a clerk 4 person, or do you just not need a clerk person? 5 MR. DUNCAN: You don't need a clerk person. 6 We've tried that, and it would just get in the way. We'd 7 like -- see, by reviewing and auditing their own files, we 8 know what's going on, and it's kind of a hands-on operation. 9 If -- if you got a clerk in there, it's kind of a loss of 10 time and effort. This way, it's really concentrating so 11 that it's hand-on. Like, I look at the files every day and 12 I run an audit trail; I know who's delinquent and who's not, 13 and that's very important to do. If I got a clerk, then 14 it's just another communications area to get into. 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And my last question, 16 right now, what do we have in this department? We have -- 17 MR. DUNCAN: Me and Brad. 18 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And what's your pay? 19 MR. DUNCAN: My -- you don't want to know. 20 COMMISSIONER LETZ: From a budget standpoint, 21 I want to know. 22 MR. DUNCAN: Budget -- for budget, my salary 23 is $15,160 a year. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: God, how'd he get that 25 high? 5-13-02 117 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: But you get three from 2 that -- 3 MR. DUNCAN: I get three from Probation. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: So it's actually 18. 5 MR. DUNCAN: So it's -- actual current budget 6 is $18,700. 7 COMMISSIONER LETZ: And Brad currently gets 8 $22,000? 9 MR. DUNCAN: It's $22,989. 10 COMMISSIONER LETZ: $22,000, so we're going 11 from a -- proposed going from an 18 and a 23 to a 22 and a 12 27. Round it off. 13 MR. DUNCAN: You're looking at $8,000 plus 14 perks and bennies. You're looking at another 30 percent, so 15 you're looking right at $12,000 a year. But I think it's 16 money well spent. I mean, if you want my two cents worth. 17 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: If you offset that 18 with the revenue that comes in because of it, that -- 19 MR. DUNCAN: Yeah. 20 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: -- that's a cheap 21 deal. 22 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Inexpensive. 23 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Inexpensive. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I used to think it was 25 cheap. 5-13-02 118 1 (Laughter.) 2 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: We got him cheap. We 3 won't get another one cheap. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 5 comments? 6 MR. DUNCAN: Thank you, Judge. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Duncan. 8 MS. UECKER: I have a couple comments, if I 9 may, Judge. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Sure. 11 MS. UECKER: Of course, you knew I would, 12 right? Of course, no one is a bigger fan of Russ Duncan 13 than I am, and we've tried to do everything to -- from 14 stopping the closing on the sale of his house here and 15 purchase of his house in Florida to try to get him to stay. 16 But my comment is about the assistant's position that he 17 calls "deputy." The law does not provide for a deputy 18 collections officer or any department head -- in any 19 department other than the District Clerk or the County Clerk 20 or the Sheriff's Department. 21 MR. DUNCAN: That's true. 22 MS. UECKER: That position does not have to 23 be bonded, where deputies do. And I have a little bit of a 24 problem with the 17-1. I'm not saying that they don't 25 deserve it, but my question is -- and I assume it's going to 5-13-02 119 1 be set at that probably because it's a man. And I'm sorry 2 if that offends you, but that's probably the situation. 3 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: That is offensive. 4 MS. UECKER: I know. 5 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: No, I'm serious about 6 that. That's not part of this deal. 7 MS. UECKER: Well, whatever. We'll see. The 8 problem I have with it is, I looked at that job description. 9 It's somewhat less required than that of a deputy clerk, 10 either County or District, and yet the entry level there is 11 -- is much lower, and we have to be bonded. So, it's just a 12 thought. I want you to keep it in mind come budget time. 13 I'm not saying that, you know, that person doesn't deserve 14 that salary. I just keep seeing some -- a little bit of 15 discrepancy in the job description versus the salaries. And 16 that's just a comment, and that's just my opinion. I 17 haven't talked to the County Clerk about it yet. 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 19 comments? Do we have a motion, Commissioner Baldwin? 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah. I move that we 21 promote Brad Alford to Chief Collections Officer effective 22 July 1, 2002, at a pay rate of grade 17-1. 23 JUDGE HENNEKE: No, that's the deputy. 24 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. 25 JUDGE HENNEKE: It's $27,000. 5-13-02 120 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yeah, the 27. I'm 2 sorry, I'm reading two different places here. At $27,000. 3 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Judge, do we need to 4 tie that to a grade and step? 5 JUDGE HENNEKE: No, because it's a department 6 head. 7 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Oh, I withdraw that. 8 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do I have a second? 9 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Second. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 11 Baldwin, second by Commissioner Griffin, that the Court 12 appoint Brad Alford as Chief Collections Officer effective 13 July 1, 2002, at an annual salary of $27,000. Any questions 14 or comments? 15 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Where's the money coming 16 from? 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: I think Brad's salary will be 18 covered by the fact that Russ is not going to be here. 19 They'll pick up just over $4,000 from Mr. Duncan's 20 departure, which will cover the -- you know, his increased 21 salary till the end of budget. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: There's no money in the 23 deputy's salary line item for that. The question will be 24 where the next one is coming in, where the assistant's is 25 coming from. 5-13-02 121 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll work on that. 2 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay. I'll go along with 3 that at this point. 4 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions or 5 comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand. 6 (The motion carried by unanimous vote.) 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Opposed, same sign. 8 (No response.) 9 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Now, as far as this 11 number two position at Grade 17-1 or Grade 17-something, I 12 went down and spoke with Mr. Alford last week, and he -- you 13 know, just to feel him out, what he was thinking. I didn't 14 want to -- I didn't want us to be doing something -- or do 15 something that would offend him, and, you know, kind of work 16 the thing out before it got here. And he has a couple of 17 people in mind. I've had a couple of people that have 18 approached me wanting the position, and -- and I tell you, 19 I'm just going to kind of throw my hands up. Here's the 20 deal. I -- I've fallen in love with the program, and I 21 think that it is a bright light in Kerr County, that it can 22 do a lot of things. It collects a lot of money, but my 23 favorite part of it is that there are people being held 24 accountable that go through our courts and are fined, and 25 we're holding them accountable, and that's one of my 5-13-02 122 1 favorite things toward -- about this entire program. And I 2 got to thinking about it. Who would I choose? Who would 3 I -- if I could choose anybody on the face of the earth that 4 I know of that would fit in this program to enhance this 5 bright and shining light, who would it be? And the -- my -- 6 the best person that I can think of is our secretary, is 7 Thea. She's the person that is -- understands courts, 8 understands the system, the County system, and understands 9 this program. And it would -- you know, if there's any -- 10 any way that we could work that out, if she would consider 11 the position, that would be the best thing for this entire 12 county, in my -- just my opinion. Now, I haven't talked to 13 Thea about it. You know, that's just my opinion; I don't 14 have to talk to Thea about it. That's the way I think. I'm 15 paying her a compliment, and I think that she -- it would be 16 the -- she would be the best person for that position and do 17 the best thing for the entire county. That's my opinion. 18 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Well, you're entitled 19 to your opinion. That's fine. 20 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Thank you very much. 21 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I think we probably 22 need to talk about this in executive session in terms of 23 personnel. 24 COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Do we have the names 25 of other -- or -- 5-13-02 123 1 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I don't. Brad -- Brad 2 is gone on some trip or something. 3 MR. DUNCAN: Brad is at a Crimestoppers 4 convention. And according to personnel rules, if we hire 5 in-house, we haven't got to post. If you don't hire 6 in-house, you consider others, you need to post it for some 7 time, according to what Barbara told me. So, I would -- 8 if -- you know, I would -- I serve at your pleasure, so I'll 9 do whatever. And I've had a number of inquiries from 10 different people. I haven't looked at anybody yet, more or 11 less because I'm waiting to see what your pleasure is, but I 12 would -- 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: A number of people 14 all being within the system? 15 MR. DUNCAN: No, some are outside the system. 16 JUDGE HENNEKE: Some are outside the system. 17 MR. DUNCAN: I think there's a female jailer 18 out at the Sheriff's Office who has called to inquire, and 19 I've -- I told her to make up a resume, but don't do 20 anything till I hear what the pleasure of the Court is. 21 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: How many people? 22 MR. DUNCAN: Four. 23 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Four? Cool. 24 MR. DUNCAN: And that's at the pleasure of 25 the Court, so -- but I -- 5-13-02 124 1 MS. PIEPER: You need to decide what their 2 pay is before you go publicize any of those so they know 3 what to tell them. 4 MS. UECKER: Wouldn't that department head 5 have to hire their own staff? 6 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Maybe. 7 JUDGE HENNEKE: Perhaps we ought to take 8 up -- set the grade and step to that as a 17 so we'll have 9 that one out of the way. 10 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Okay. 11 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do we have a motion to that 12 effect? 13 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What was it? 14 JUDGE HENNEKE: To set the -- the number two 15 position at Grade 17. 16 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I move it. 17 JUDGE HENNEKE: Do I have a second? 18 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I second the motion. 19 JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner 20 Williams, second by Commissioner Baldwin, that the Court set 21 the grade for the collections officer at a pay grade of 17. 22 COMMISSIONER LETZ: Only comment I have, I 23 really -- I'm uncomfortable. I won't go for it right now, 24 'cause I'm not convinced that that's where that should be. 25 I think we really need to -- this is going to have -- this 5-13-02 125 1 vote will be a budget impact. We don't have the money in 2 the budget for this item, and it's a -- to me, I just want 3 to make sure. I'm not sure -- I'm not at that point right 4 now, that this is where it needs to be. I haven't even seen 5 the job description. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Any more questions? 7 MR. DUNCAN: This -- the original job 8 description for that was done on that Nash study that was 9 done some time ago, and I think that's what our personnel 10 person was looking at, is the job description that was 11 submitted to the board -- to the Commissioners Court by 12 Nash. And I think that was the level it was set by -- by 13 their study, and so that's what she's going by. So -- 14 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Judge, actually, that 15 is not such a great big important issue to deal with here 16 today, I don't think. I mean, we can -- I just don't see 17 why that's so important to do it today. I think that that 18 is -- that we can go back, and let's satisfy Commissioner 19 Letz' concerns. I'm kind of a little bit concerned about it 20 too. I actually haven't looked at it, and I really think 21 that we do need to really take a look at it and get -- get 22 with the Treasurer and get some thoughts on it. I just -- 23 I'm a little uncomfortable. 24 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I'll withdraw the 25 motion. 5-13-02 126 1 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. All right. 2 COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You withdraw the 3 second? 4 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I'll withdraw the 5 second. 6 JUDGE HENNEKE: Can't have a second without a 7 motion. All right. Do we need to go into executive session 8 to discuss the requirements on the candidates? 9 COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: I would like that. 10 JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. At this time, the 11 Court will go into executive session to discuss the 12 potential candidates for the position, this number two 13 position in the Collections Department, and we'll reconvene 14 after completion of our executive session. 15 (The open session was closed at 11:47 a.m., and an executive session was held, the 16 transcript of which is contained in a separate document.) 17 - - - - - - - - - - 18 JUDGE HENNEKE: The Court having concluded 19 the executive session, we'll now return to open session. No 20 action is required as a result of executive session. Is 21 there any other business to come before this court? If not, 22 we stand adjourned. 23 (Commissioners Court adjourned at 12:11 p.m.) 24 - - - - - - - - - - 25 5-13-02 127 1 STATE OF TEXAS | 2 COUNTY OF KERR | 3 The above and foregoing is a true and complete 4 transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as 5 County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County, 6 Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth. 7 DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 17th day of May, 2002. 8 9 10 JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk 11 BY: _________________________________ Kathy Banik, Deputy County Clerk 12 Certified Shorthand Reporter 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5-13-02